Tchaikovskys-Orch-Style Analis SM 6

Thematic Counterpoint
And Adjacent Constructional Texturing

In Tchaikovsky's Six Symphonies
Svein Hundsnes
Table of Content
Acknowledgements
Preface
Abstract
Part 1
1.1 General reception
1.1.1 Introduction
1.1.2 The Russian
10
1.1.3 The not-so-Russian
12
1.1.4 The homosexual
14
1.1.5 The neurotic
15
1.1.6 Musicological status by the onset of the twenty-first century
18
1.2 General aspects to counterpoint

related to symphonic music of the Nineteenth Century
20
1.2.1 Occurrence of thematic counterpoint in symphonic literature before

Tchaikovsky and his contemporaries
20
1.2.2 Possible direct influences
22
1.3 Definitions of some selected concepts appearing in this document
23
1.3.1 Introduction
23
1.3.2 Poly-linear textures ('Constructions')
24
1.3.3 Thematic counterpoint
25
1.3.4 Local counterpoint
26
1.3.5 Semi-thematic counterpoint and Stylized counterpoint
26
1.3.6 Textural field (texture)
28
1.3.7 Textural layer ('layer'/segment)
28
1.3.8 Textural element
29
1.3.9 Textural Counterpoint; Textural Strategy or Textural Factor
29
1.3.10 Texture-confined counterpoint
30
1.3.11 Motivic textural transfer (Textural Transfer)
31
1.3.12 Imprint
31
1.3.13 Physical direction (direction)
31
2
1.4 Comments about the score examples
32
1.4.1 Presentation and intention
32
1.4.2 Abbreviations in score reductions
32
1.5 Analysis
33
1.5.1 Thematic and motivic classification used in music examples
33
1.5.2 Analysis in context
33
1.6 Extent of contrapuntal activity within each movement
34
1.7 Related problems for future discussion and research
35
1.7.1 Counterpoint, research and verifiability
36
1.7.2 Triads in contrapuntal context
37
1.7.3 Harmonic progression
37
1.8 Nineteenth century orchestral counterpoint,

as expressed in current analytic literature
38
1.8.1 Introduction
38
1.8.2 The counterpoint of Johannes Brahms, as discussed in two anthologies
39
Part 2
2 Constructional texturing in Tchaikovsky's Six Symphonies
44
2.1.1 Symphony No.1 in g-minor op. 13
44
2.1.1.1 S. No.1, Movement I: Orchestral backdrop: Textural Counterpoint;

Architectonic coherence; Textural/Orchestral Factor
46
2.1.1.2 Thematic counterpoint
55
2.1.2 Symphony No.1, movement II (Land of Desolation, Land of Mists)
66
2.1.3 Symphony No.1, movement III: Contrary motion and timbral contrast
70
2.1.4 Symphony No.1, movement IV
77
2.1.4.1 Semi-thematic counterpoint
77
3
2.1.4.2 Thematic Counterpoint
82
2.2 Symphony No.2 in c minor, op.17 The Little Russian (Final version)
91
2.2.1 Introduction: A Russian Backdrop for The Little Russian
91
2.2.1.1 Symphony No.2, movement I, Thematic material
91
2.2.1.2 Thematically based counterpoint in the first movement
95
2.2.2 Second Symphony, movement II
105
2.2.3 Second Symphony, movement III
115
2.2.4 Second Symphony, movement IV
123
2.3 Symphony No. 3 in D, op.29
133
2.3.1 Symphony No.3, movement I
133
2.3.2 Symphony No.3, movement II
151
2.3.3 Symphony No.3, Movement III
154
157
2.3.5 Symphony No.3, movement V
159
2.4 Symphony No.4 in f-minor, opus 36
169
169
187
2.4.3 Symphony No.4, movement III
189
189
2.5 Symphony No.5 in e minor, opus 64
197
198
206
213
216
2.6 Symphony No.6 in b-minor (Pathtique"), opus 74
230
230
244
247
257
3. Conclusion
262
References
264
Appendix: Overview of contrapuntal activity in the six symphonies
267
Acknowledgements
First of all I will take the opportunity to thank my colleagues at the University of Stavanager
for interesting and fruitful exchange of views about Tchaikovsky, counterpoint and issues
relating to reception and historicity during the work with my dissertation. Thanks also to Nina
Stangeland at our library, who was unstoppable when it came to searching for wanted books
and articles. Above all my most heartfelt thanks go to Asbjrn Eriksen and Brett Langston for
interesting discussions and comments during the final phase of my work. I am also grateful to
the majority of Tchaikovsky-researchers from the last two decades, who have definitely been
a big inspiration for me.
Last but not least, my sincere gratitude also goes to my dear family, for their patience and
support.
Preface
The majority of previous musicological literature presents Tchaikovsky as a composer who
finds difficulty in constructing and developing his works, although one must admit that these
views have been substantially challenged by several commentators after the hundredth
anniversary of the composers death. The objective of this document has been to disclose
texturally constructional features with Tchaikovsky, features which have been as good as left
out in previous musicological literature.
What attracted my attention when I was getting acquainted with Tchaikovsky's music in my
early teens was not primarily his melodic flair, but his multi-layered textures, a phenomenon I
should later mainly associate with contrapuntal textures. Since then I have become
increasingly aware of how important this feature is as a technical and developmental means in
Tchaikovsky's music and have, as a consequence, wished to dig deeper into this field for quite
some time. I have always felt highly uncomfortable about the fact that Tchaikovsky - the way
he is described in the majority of musicological literature - did not correspond with my own
views, and that having an admiration for the technical qualities of this music was not
perceived as aesthetically correct within some circles, to say the least. Texturally speaking
Tchaikovsky was in my opinion completely different from - even opposite of - the composer
described in ditto musicological texts. Yet relatively recent biographical and analytical works
on Tchaikovsky, together with recognition from highly esteemed composers like Stravinsky
6
and Shostakovich, have given me the inspiration as well as courage to contribute the way I
can in an attempt to readjust the dubious view which previous musicological factions have
expressed on this composer.
Even though this thesis reveals and pinpoints previously under-communicated aspects to
counterpoint in Tchaikovskys symphonies - in addition to other textural features - it is my
hope that it may spur theorists as well as musicians to a new or at least significantly
broadened understanding and further research as concerns the technical aspects to
Tchaikovskys music on a general level.
Abstract
Although some might be tempted to claim that Tchaikovskys symphonic movements may
sometimes have reached their peak already before the development - and that his themes are
so fulfilled that there is little more to be developed or added - this thesis reveals that
Tchaikovskys developments do not primarily rely on linear monophonic growth or variation,
a procedure which might hypothetically have implied a dismantling or deconstruction of
something that was already perfect. Sooner on the contrary; in order to accelerate the
thematic work Tchaikovskys thematically based counterpoint becomes his most important
developmental procedure almost out of necessity, thus enabling the composer to justify the
use of unabashedly soaring melodic material for symphonic purpose. Quite often he
alternatively chooses to cultivate small melodic motives or cells in the polyphonic web, thus
his technique is far from unequivocal.
Circumstances not nescessarily relating directly toTchaikovsky's music as such might to some
extent explain why analysts may have failed to see constructional aspects of it, or,
alternatively, choosen to ignore them. Such circumstances, dealing above all with nationality,
sexuality and mental illness, are discussed in this dissertation, since they constitute a highly
crucial factor if one attempts to perceive the musicological climate leading to the kind of
sedimenting negative attitudes toward Tchaikovsky we may encounter even today.
In order to examine a possible contrapuntal tendency in Tchaikovsky, several approaches
from his vast and extremely varied output might have been possible. This thesis deals
primarily with all the six numbered symphonies. A possible scrutiny of one single work might
7
have given the impression that Tchaikovskys contrapuntal procedures were confined to that
work in particular or at least that it might be the most representative or most successful
work in respect of this quality. Since I have wanted to demonstrate a general, sustained
characteristic with the composer, and since just a fraction from one single parameter (
constructive textural aspects) is under examination, a somewhat wider selection of works felt
appropriate, even inevitable. I have for some time been rather reluctant to support the view
that Tchaikovsky should be left out among nineteenth century composers particularly
concerned with counterpoint1, and the analyses carried out in this document reveal that
thematically based counterpoint is a highly central characteristic of this composer, occurring
regularly in all his symphonies.
Tchaikovsky's six symphonies were composed within fairly regular time intervals during his
life, and are thus quite representative of the composer and his orchestral style: The first
drafting of No.1 was begun already in 1866 and No.6 was written shortly before his death in
1893. Indirectly this document also comments on issues regarding orchestration; good
orchestration is not only due to aspects of instrumentation and timbral materiality, but at least
equally much to aspects in respect of relatively independent or complementing thematic or
semi-thematic layers within each texture. In addition it deals with textural architecture on
local as well as pan-textural level.
Depending on the structure of each movement, two slightly varied approaches have been used
as regards presentation; the main procedure has been one of referring to the various textural
techniques in the order of their appearances, alternatively - if it suits the movement in
question - by segregating various sub-textural aspects in order to give each technique
sufficient focus.
Where does Tchaikovsky stand in the poly-linear landscape of Nineteenth Century symphonic
music? Brief references have been made in respect of thematic counterpoint in a symphonic
context inside a historical as well as contemporary frame of reference. Although I am far from
being an expert on the symphonies of Brahms and Bruckner, I felt it was nescessary to adress
literature dealing with the symphonies of at least one of these composers in respect of
counterpoint, since traditional and current musicology have mostly referred to them as
contrapuntists, directly or indirectly referring to Tchaikovsky as their opposite. In much
literature it is by far unusual to find that assertions concerning a composers style or the
See, for example, Grove Music Online: Counterpoint; The Classical and Romantic era (access 2008-13).
quality of a specific work are just assertions, without supportive technical descriptions or
analyses. With this document it is sooner the other way round; it aimes at giving a reasonable
record of an extremely crucial aspect of Tchaikovskys textural style. Consequently the actual
score examples, supplied with brief yet vital information, are at least equally important as the
remaining text as such, and much effort has been invested in making these examples as selfexplanatory as possible.
Thus the methodological centre of this dissertation lies with the written music, with a focus on
textural and thematic anaysis. Generally speaking the analyses as such make use of the same
approach as central writings and analyses written by the onset of the twentyfirst century, that
is to say; in literature where contrapuntal aspects have in fact been described in some detail.
In this document the textural analyses have been assisted by an extended system of concepts,
as the author has felt the need of specifying some aspects regarding orchestral texturing and
counterpoint. Finding and using these specified consepts have not been entirely
unproblematic. Thus they should be read as introductory steps into this field, intending to
increase our consciousness when it comes to describing counterpoint in nineteenthcentury
symphonic music; they are not in themselves crucial for the understanding of Tchaikovsky as
textural architect. These extended specifications have challenged the author to be more
specific than what is usually the case in similar analytical contexts, and on a general scale
they have prooved more helpful than problematic.
The thesis thus consists of two major parts:
1. Background material and definitions
2. Examination of contrapuntal work in the six symphonies
1.1 General reception in Anglophone musicography

1.1.1 Introduction
Can aspects dealing with Tchaikovskys reception history explain, at least to some extent,
some possible reluctance or lack of interest in assessing the composers strengths as a
composer? (We have to assume that the ability of the commentators has always been
present) Attacks on the composer as well as his music have been launched from various
9
angles, from the time his first works were premiered until today. When Tchaikovsky started
his symphonic career, he had but few national predecessors, and he was one of the very first
students at the St. Petersburg Conservatory to write a symphony. To be sure, Glinka had
written orchestral music as well as operas which had been rapidly established in Russian
musical life, but Rimsky-Korsakov, Balakirev, Borodin and Tchaikovsky were the pioneers of
Russian symphonic music as such.
Before examining the central issue of this document, an introductory examination of some
factors leading up to Tchaikovskys present musicological status seems appropriate.
1.1.2 The Russian

The pioneers of Russian symphonic music were met with scepticism by many influential
Central European critics from the very start they entered the western European musical scene.
Hanslicks review after his first acquaintance with the finale in Tchaikovskys Violin
Concerto, where he claimed that he could hear music stink, seems to have bestowed him a
secure position in the history of music criticism2, together with his equally often quoted
characterization of the finale of the Serenade for Strings as Cossack Cheer. But even though
Hanslick in fact had a more detailed and varied view on Tchaikovsky3, the mainstream
western twentieth century music theorists and writers were for a long time rather hostile to
Russian music in general and Tchaikovsky in particular. In the middle 1890s Tchaikovskys
music had won a tremendous following with the British audiences within an astoundingly
short time. But this remarkable success had a first shot across the bows when Francis Tovey
in 1905 became the principle contributor to the eleventh edition of the Encyclopaedia
Britannica. From that year he was extremely influential as a writer, and his many disciples
stood in line to surpass their master in marginalizing Russian music. The leading figure of this
generation was Gerald Abraham who wrote several books on Russian music.4 Abraham was
to become one of the most influential writers in England for several decades. His standard
MODEST T CHAIKOVSKY : Tchaikovsky's Life, Vol.2, Zhizn, Moscow 1901, p.503

He realized immediately, for example, the legitimacy of the form of Tchaikovskys Sixth Symphony. Yet it
should be noted that he found no Russian element in that work, as opposed to the above-mentioned finale.
4
These volumes include (in chronological order): 1927; biography on Borodin. 1935; Studies in Russian
Music. 1936; contributions to Masters of Russian Music. 1939; On Russian Music. 1943; Eight Soviet
Composers. 1944: Tchaikovsky. 1945; Tchaikovsky: a Symposium.
3
10
work 100 Years of Music was published in 1938 and had its latest revision as late as 1974.
Here is a rendering of Abrahams view on Russian music (1974 edition):
Another peculiarity of the Russian creative mind in general is its inability to conceive organic
wholes. The Russian thinks most naturally in episodes and produces his general effects by the
accumulation of episodes () Naturally the same disjointedness (and the same lack of
dynamic `drama' in the ordinary sense of the word) is very apparent in Russian opera .(...)
The same peculiarity can be detected in Russian music in general. (...)5
Later follows an attempt to describe the music per se:

The interaction of melody and harmony so often apparent in the music of the great
German masters is comparatively rare in Russian music ... the bulk of Russian music
seems to have been conceived primarily in terms of line and timbre; the harmony is
support, spice, sound-padding - but not living tissue.
That is true of the contrapuntal element in Russian music. Genuine, spontaneous
contrapuntal thought seems to be quite foreign to the Russian nature. () Tchaikovsky
() was completely incapable of writing a true `theme' and apparently never tried to write
one till he reached the Pathetique6.
How exactly Abraham reached the conclusion that genuine, spontaneous contrapuntal
thought seems to be quite foreign to the Russian nature is a mystery, though, as we
shall see in our final chapter, this allegation seems to have been adopted and taken for
granted by some later commentators. When David Brown some years later writes his
large-scale biography on Tchaikovsky, he nails down that my greatest debt has been to
Gerald Abraham, 7 thus indicating there is little hope of finding views within these four
volumes that depart significantly from Abrahams dogmas.
Commenting on the reception of Russian music in general, Richard Taruskin account s
for how the myth lives on in his preface to Defining Russia Musically. 8 Taruskins
broad examination on this subject leads to, for example, the following deduction:
At the very least it will be evident that ideologies of promulgation and reception affecting
Russian art music have been far more explicitly formulated and acknowledged, as a rule, than
those of the "universal" repertories with which the Russian product has contended; and that,
often enough, such formulations have been hollow excuses, founded on garish double standards,
5
6
7
8
GERALD ABRAHAM: 100 Years of Music, 4.th edition, 1974 p.148

Ibid, p.169.
D AVID B ROWN: Tchaikovsky. The Early Years, 1840-1874. W. W. Norton & Co. Inc., New York, 1978, p.13
R ICHARD T ARUSKIN : Defining Russia Musically: Historical and Hermeneutical Essays, Princeton University
Press, 1997 p. xiv
11
for tendentious value judgments. "A Russian symphony? A contradiction in terms!" my most
distinguished professor in graduate school could still snort not so many years ago ()9
Martin Cooper helps in underlining Taruskins, or, rather, his most distinguished professors
point:
() Russian folk-song, on account of its repetitive character and its tendency to be itself a
microscopic set of variations, is peculiarly unsuitable [for musical development].10
There was also another side of Russianness, which has been discussed by Maes and Taruskin,
namely that of Colonial Russia and orientalism. Maes draws attention to how Westerners
perceived orientalism as inferior to Western ideas:
During the colonial period orientalism was (...) a means of expressing Western feelings of
superiority, as the entire non-Western world was made to play the role of "the other." While
the rule of reason prevailed in the West, irrationality and barbarism were seen to reign
supreme in the East. (...) In the West, orientalism is among the best-known aspects of Russian
music, so much so, in fact, that it is widely considered a feature of the Russian national
character, a view that was firmly held by Stasov and has been one of the dogmas of traditional
historiography ever since. 11
Yet, as we all know, as compared to, for example, Borodin and Rimsky-Korsakov,
Tchaikovsky's "oriental" contributions were rather microscopic, particularly taking into
account his vast production.
1.1.3 The not-so-Russian

Taruskin reflects on some tendencies within public as well as musicological circles to dwell
on the possible Russianness of Russian music, for example The Mighty Handfuls often
debated position vis--vis Tchaikovsky, where Tchaikovsky was not regarded to be
sufficiently Russian, thus suddenly finding himself in a double bind, this time lacking in
'Russianness'. Taruskin refers to Csar Cuis influence upon Western European musical life as
regards Tchaikovskys positioning as a Russian composer:
Ibid. p. xvii
10
MARTIN COOPER (ed. Gerald Abraham: Tchaikovsky, A Symposium) Lindsay Drummond Ltd., London,
1945, p.30
11
Francis Maes, Geshiedenis van de Russische muziek: Van Kamarinskaja tot Babi Jar (1996), English
translation 2002, UCLA, p. 80
12
Even before Diaghilev, French critical antipathy to Chaikovsky ran high. Its source probably lay
in Cesar Cui's outrageously partisan survey La Musique en Russie, a reissue in book form of a
series of articles originally published in 1878 in the Revue et Gazette musicale, which furnished a
whole generation of French critics and writers on music with virtually their sole source of
information on Russian music. Cui had dismissed Chaikovsky as "a musician of extraordinary
talent, except that he abuses his technical facility," and, most unfairly, as being "far from a partisan
of the New Russian school; he is more nearly its antagonist."
Though this last assertion was no truer than the notion of a monolithic "New Russian school"
itself, it played into the Western prejudice about exotic group identities and formed French opinion
irrevocably. 12
As most readers will know, Cui was a member of The Five, thus a competitor with
Tchaikovsky on the Russian musical scene. He was at the same time a most influential music
critic, thus being at once prosecutor, judge and executioner.
Yet even though French antipathy towards Tchaikovsky arose a couple of decades before the
British/American, we have already witnessed that the latter did not eventually evolve into a
more matter-of-factly type of reception. The mighty handful, here represented by Cui,
succeeded in defining Tchaikovsky as a westernized or un-Russian composer. Whether
Russianness should be regarded as something fundamentally positive or negative has been
an apparently never-ending issue for debate. Taruskin refers to The New Grove back to 1980
where the Second Symphony outranked number Four and Five on basis of being
Tchaikovskys most fully Russian work.13 Just as Stravinsky is right in ascertaining that
Tchaikovsky was the most Russian of us all, so is Taruskin correct in saying that
Tchaikovsky views the Russian aspect of his music to be rather irrelevant. Taking both
these considerations into account, Tchaikovskys work might thus be interpreted both within
an extended hermeneutical socio-geographical context as well as within one more purely
professional, subject to technical scrutiny. Most obviously this may, on the on hand, imply a
departure from the classical German/Austrian tradition. Those who, well into the twenty-first
century, claim that, for example, "The Little Russian" must be judged, or at least partly
judged, on other premises than purely those of the Viennese school, are most probably
granted such premises. As we all know, the symphony as such, as regards both form and
content, has eventually developed into a multitude of directions, some of which can hardly be
traced back only to the German-Austrian tradition. On the other hand, moving for a moment
back to early twentieth century western musicology, the nineteenth century Russian
12
R ICHARD T ARUSKIN: Defining Russia Musically: Historical and Hermeneutical Essays, Princeton University
Press, 1997, p.49
13
Ibid, p. xvii
13
symphonists were not automatically allowed to redefine the established formulas, regardless
of the nature of this redefinition, regardless of the originality of their work. We may therefore
observe, at least indirectly, that some western commentators are not always so interested in
examining the possible originality or individuality of a specific work, but, at least indirectly,
more concerned about whether or not it adheres to German/Austrian or at least Central
European tradition.
1.1.4 The homosexual
Already during Tchaikovskys lifetime, musical circles in Russia were aware of his
homosexual tendency, and this awareness was partly misused by critics like Csar Cui, not
neglecting to make disparaging characteristics of Ts music as feminine;
Tchaikovsky is primarily a lyric poet who is gentle, feminine, most often melancholy, though
14
sincere and attractive, (...) his music has little passion, force or energy
At this point of time only a few people outside Russia had any knowledge about
Tchaikovskys sexual tendency, and one might just as well find characteristics about
Tchaikovskys music which ran counter to Cuis comments. In a "The Musical Times review
a critic referred to the outer movements of the Fourth Symphony as "... more an appeal to the
judgment than to the emotions [italics added].15
George Bernard Shaw reflects thus after attending the same concert:
I need only say that [the Fourth Symphony] is highly characteristic of him. In the first
movement, the only one with a distinct poetic basis, he is, as ever, "le Byron de nos jours"; and in
the later (...) [movements], where he is confessedly the orchestral voluptuary, he is Byronic in that
too. The notablest merit of the symphony is its freedom from the frightful effeminacy of most
modern works of the romantic school [italics added]. 16
But with the publishing of Rosa Newmarchs translation (1905) of Modest Tchaikovskys
biography on his brother17, the first slight biographical allusions with regard to Tchaikovskys
sexual leaning were made public18. The attitude towards Tchaikovsky changed dramatically, a
14
ALEXANDER P OZNANSKY: Tchaikovsky. The Quest for the Inner Man, 1991, p 478
From a Philharmonic Society review in The Musical Times 34/7,1st July 1893, p.406-7
16
ajkovskij-Studien 10, Schott Music GmbH & Co. KG, Mainz, 2006, p 413
17
MODEST T CHAIKOVSKY , The Life and Letters of Peter llich Tchaikovsky, translated from the Russian with
an introduction by Rosa Newmarch, reprint ed.; Haskell House, New York, 1970
18
Some commentators have argued that Modest in the biography transferred some of his own personality traits
to his brother, not always to the composers benefit.
15
14
change which can be perfectly exemplified with this citation by the American critic James
Huneker, dating from less than one year after the publication of the Newmarch biography:
I once wrote of Tchaikovsky that he said great things in a great manner. Now I sometimes feel that
the manner often exceeds the matter.
Hunekers further proclamations clearly show that there was gradually established a linkage
between the composers sexual leaning (the secret sorrow) and his music:
(Tchaikovskys) entire existence was clouded by some secret sorrow, the origin of which we
can dimly surmise, but need not investigate. ()
There is no need of further delving into the pathology of this case, () but it is well to keep the
fact in view, because of its important bearing on his music, some of which is truly pathological.
Since then, examples of linking sexually oriented characteristics to his music have been
practically endless. Comments have at times clearly surpassed the borders of humiliation and
insult:
Tchaikovsky had little reticence in describing his feelings. Even in the letters
of his middle age he would sometimes gush like a schoolgirl.
(...) The tragedy of Tchaikovsky was the denial, forced upon him, of normal
love.19
To our knowledge, these kind of humiliating comments have never been directed towards
other homosexual composers, like Benjamin Britten. With respect of Tchaikovskys
contemporaries, Brahms and Bruckner, one may just as well assume that they too in a sense
were denied normal love for the most part of their lives. But this fact has never and should
indeed never be - the object of any kind of speculations. In what way Brahms, Bruckner,
Tchaikovsky or any other composer coped with their presumed sexual drives should barely
interest us, and well into the twenty-first century most commentators will claim that this
aspect is totally irrelevant when it comes to evaluate the music as such. But is it really so? The
relatively constant focus directed towards Tchaikovskys homosexuality even in later years
will hardly promote his music, sooner the contrary: It is a fact that as late as 1987, roughly
two-thirds of Americans condemn homosexual behavior as morally wrong or a sin, a number
19
EDWARD LOCKSPEISER , Tchaikovsky the Man, in Tchaikovsky: A Symposium, ed. Gerald Abraham, Lindsay
Drummond, London, 1945 pp. 10, 13
15
which until then had been relatively constant, though very slowly moving into a more tolerant
attitude since 1970.20
1.1.5 The neurotic
Roland John Wiley explains in an article on Tchaikovsky reception some tendencies caught
up within parts of the musicological environment after the mid 1960s:
with the removal of taboos in public discussion of the 1960s and 70s, Tchaikovskys life was
caught up in a discourse, exceptional for its tenacity, linking his music with his sexuality, an
indignity that would have caused the composer unspeakable humiliation. When historical factors
were brought into play especially Freuds pathologizing of homosexuality specialist opinion of
Tchaikovskys music changed accordingly, and dubiously slanted assessments of his music
followed suit.21
But it was not uncommon to link Tchaikovskys homosexuality to mental illness even long
before the 1960s, as demonstrated in the Huneker example from 1906. Antipathy toward
homosexuality in Europe reached a climax already by the end of the 19th century. What had
earlier been regarded as a vice, evolved as a perversion or psychological illness. Official
reviews of homosexuality as both an illness and (for men) a crime led to discrimination,
inhumane treatments and shame, guilt and fear for gay men and lesbians.22
Martin Coopers comments in Gerald Abrahams 1945 Tchaikovsky symposium, regarding
Tchaikovskys penchant for the piling of climax upon climax in the top register of the
strings concluded with the following outburst:
Such passages (...) do more than tear the heart (as indeed they are meant to do) but also affect
the nerves like an exhibition of hysteria (with which they are very possibly related). This tendency
reaches its climax in the last movement of the Sixth Symphony, where the perpetually descending
phrase with which the strings open the movement is raised to a hysterical pitch of emotion ...
There is something quite unbalanced and, in the last resort, ugly, in this dropping of all restraint.
This man is ill, we feel: must we be shown all his sores without exception? Will he insist on our
not merely witnessing, but sharing, one of his nervous attacks?23
Edward Lockspeiser made an assertion that
Polls conducted by ABC, 8/87; Los Angeles Times, 8/87

ROLAND J OHN W ILEY: Tchaikovsky, 7; Reception (Grove Online, 2008-2013)
22
British Journal of Psychiatry (ISSN 0007-1250), vol. 175, 1999, pp. 106-113
23
MARTIN COOPER , The Symphonies, in Tchaikovsky: A Symposium (Gerald Abraham, ed., London: Lindsay
Drummond, 1945) pp. 33-34.
20
21
16
Tchaikovsky's mind, seen for a moment from a scientific viewpoint, constitutes a textbook
illustration of the borderland between genius and insanity.
In Tchaikovsky's character (...) the neurotic elements are inseparable from his development as a
composer. The man and his music are one - unsatisfied and inflamed.24
Those who search in Lockspeisers text for the scientific viewpoint from which this
borderland between genius and insanity can be observed, look in vain.
Beginning with the Fourth Symphony (...) Tchaikovsky's music now reflects all the indulgent
yearning and the garish exteriorization of a composer who can never refrain from wearing his
heart on his sleeve.25
The introductory chapter of this extremely influential and frequently quoted book,
Tchaikovsky A Symposium, ends by referring to a sense of guilt or sin in
Tchaikovskys music, conceived by a warped neurotic, shy and tortured26. These utterances
lead to the inevitable verdict by the middle of the twentieth century claiming that there is no
cleverness in Tchaikovsky.
The instigators of such innuendos should, though, bear in mind that their sarcasms indirectly
also hit the vast majority of concert-goers who felt that the music in some way was addressing
them. Since it is so often held that Tchaikovsky is one of the worlds best loved composers,
this inflamed music with its neurotic elements might indirectly also characterize the
majority of concert audiences throughout the world.27
Although society changes and new truths are being established, some firmly deep-rooted
myths within segments of western musicology remain rather unchanged. Of genuine
polyphonic thought there is extraordinarily little, Abraham proclaims about Tchaikovsky.28
But rather on the contrary, after close examination of Tchaikovskys scores, the present writer
will claim that of genuine polyphonic thought, there is exceptionally much. Thematic and
textural analysis of Tchaikovskys orchestral and chamber music will demonstrate clearly that
thematically oriented counterpoint permeates Tchaikovskys scores to the extent of being
severely under-communicated in preceding literature. Apparently, when contemporary
24
EDWARD LOCKSPEISER , Tchaikovsky the Man, pp. 12, 14

ibid. p. 20
26
Ibid. p. 23
25
27
GERALD NORRIS accounts for Tchaikovskys enormous popularity on the London concert scene in the mid
1890s in his book Stanford, The Cambridge Jubilee and Tchaikovsky, David & Charles, Devon, 1980, pp.48093
28
GERALD ABRAHAM : 100 Years of Music (4.th edition 1974), p.152
17
commentators are facing unavoidable, striking examples of genuine counterpoint in

Tchaikovskys scores, it looks as if they find it easier, or more correct, to comply with
previous reception and thus reducing, even ridiculing the composers achievements, as we
may observe later in this document.
1.1.6 Tchaikovskys musicological status at the onset of the Twenty-first Century

On a general basis it is quite astounding to witness the degree to which various musicologists
and biographers have chosen to stick to the verdicts of but few critics only, avoiding taking
into account the compositional insights of, for example, composers like Stravinsky and
Shostakovich. These two men made their acclaim at a time when they were well established,
belonging to the worlds leading composers, and thus had no concerns about musicological
sanction or retaliation. Though in the name of justice, one can by the turn of the millennium
observe a change in the overall tone by scholars. This progress has been made due to works
by Richard Taruskin29, Frances Maes30, Roland J. Wiley31 and others32, not so much on a
purely analytical, but possibly more on an extended hermeneutical level.
In respect of analysis, Peter A Browns volume on the symphonic repertoire also marks a
decisive step forward, moving toward a broadened perspective on Tchaikovskys symphonic
style,33although he, as we shall return to later, cannot completely escape imperatives dictated
by dogmas and previous reception. Only a couple of years earlier, the author on Tchaikovsky
in "The Nineteenth Century Symphony" had based his views of Tchaikovsky's symphonies on
the following thesis:
29 R ICHARD T ARUSKIN: Tchaikovsky: A New View - A Centennial Essay, in: Tchaikovsky and His
Contemporaries: A Centennial Symposium [1993], edited by Alexandar Mihailovic, Westport, Connecticut London 1999, S. 16-60. 1999, see also
Defining Russia Musically: Historical and Hermeneutical Essays, (Princeton University Press, 1997) and
On Russian Music (University of California Press, 2008)
30
FRANCIS M AES : Geshiedenis van de Russische muziek: Van Kamarinskaja tot Babi Jar (1996), English
translation UCLA 2002
31
ROLAND J OHN W ILEY: Tchaikovsky (Oxford University Press, New York, 2009)
Special note should be made of Alexander Poznansky & Brett Langstons The Tchaikovsky Handbooks
(Indiana University Press, 2002) and Poznanskys: Tchaikovsky. The Quest for the Inner Man (English edition
by Lime Tree, London, 1993)
32
33
A. P ETER B ROWN: The Symphonic Repertoire Volume III Part B (Indiana University Press, Bloomington
2008) p.333 ff
18
"For Tchaikovsky, the concept of symphony as an abstract, impersonal genre was
simply an impossibility." 34
It may be worth noting that once extremely influential persons like Francis Tovey and the
majority among writers referred to in earlier paragraphs, are as good as excluded from, and
never referred to, in large editorial volumes like The Cambridge History of Nineteenth
Century Music (2002). But persistent heirs of the Tovey/Abraham tradition still lurk behind
the scenes:
Tchaikowsky composed a good deal of piano music, most of it, in this writer's experience, an
indication of his capacity for unnerving miscalculation. This is evident in other genres too,
especially the piano concerto, where following the First (1876), which may with justification be
called the best-known piano concerto of all time, there followed two more, neither of which is
much performed or deserves to be. The second, for example, was instantly disliked. George
Bernard Shaw wrote after a London performance in 1890 that the work was `impulsive, copious,
difficult, and pretentious; but it has no distinction, no originality, no feeling for the solo
instrument, nothing to rouse the attention or to occupy the memory'.35
Not only may one become a little bewildered by the somewhat harsh and slightly bitter tone
pervading these lines: A most urgent question arises; how can the best-known piano
concerto of all time stand as an example of unnerving miscalculation? Rather on the
contrary, it might possibly have made some sense to claim that the best-known piano
concerto of all time is a product of consistent, speculative, though successful calculation.
By contrast, Francis Maes describes the work as
The clearest example of the combination of lyrical spontaneity and structural
planning ()[italics added]. 36
The article-writer of the Cambridge volumes notification that Tchaikovskys Second

Concerto, was instantly disliked, must be based on a misunderstanding, since the work after
its world premiere in New York more than seven years in advance of the Shaw review had
been repeatedly performed, especially in Russia.
34
J OSEPH KRAUSS : Tchaikovsky in The Nineteenth Century Symphony, ed. D. Kern Holoman, (Schirmer
Books, London, 1997) p.299
35
J ONATHAN DUNSBY, Chamber music and piano in The Cambridge History of Nineteenth Century Music,
Cambridge University Press, 2002, p.510
36
FRANCIS M AES, Geshiedenis van de Russische muziek: Van Kamarinskaja tot Babi Jar (1996), English
translation 2002 (UCLA) p.75.
19
One might expectantly look forward to a closer explanation of Tchaikovskys unnerving

miscalculation from the author of the lines quoted earlier. Furthermore, one might also look
forward to an explanation why the Second Concerto does not deserve to be much played.
Until then Stephen Houghs opinion that the second concerto is every bit as good as the
first37 might serve as an alternative view.
The previous quotations stem from the only chapter in the quite extensive Cambridge volume
that contains about half a page dedicated to Tchaikovsky, and thus brings echoes of previous
reception, preconceptions and prejudices into the Twenty-first Century.
Oceans of further research lie ahead of us if we really want to uncover every aspect of
Tchaikovskys musical style. Shostakovich not only wanted to reveal aspects of this style, in
some ways he even succeeded. He once wrote:
When I myself encounter difficulty in the course of my work I invariably find the solution
to my problems by studying Tchaikovskys technique
38
1.2 General aspects to counterpoint

related to symphonic music of the Nineteenth Century
1.2.1 Occurrence of thematic counterpoint in symphonic literature before Tchaikovsky

and his contemporaries
In order to possibly obtain fair and precise overview of substantial counterpoint within this
vast span of symphonic literature, we must, obviously, call for a future equally close
examination like the forthcoming. Thus the below brief overview must be read just as fairly
rough sketch sooner than a complete picture.
At the time Tchaikovsky wrote his first symphony, we know that he particularly admired
Mendelssohns Fourth Symphony and Schumanns Third. Thematic counterpoint is not an
37
Quote from Stephen Hough's Blog in The Telegraph after his recordings of Tchaikovsky's complete works for
piano and orchestra, for which he received the 2010 Royal Philharmonic Society Award.
38
DMITRI SHOSTAKOVICH : Thoughts about Tchaikovsky in Russian Symphony, Philosophical Library,
New York, 1947, p.4
20
excessively predominant feature with any of these two works. On the other hand
Mendelssohns Mozartean taste for contrasted and well-balanced timbre is a general textural
feature being cultivated to a significant degree in the vast majority of orchestral works by
Tchaikovsky. Substantial counterpoint particularly worthy of mention is found, for example,
in Mendelssohn's No.2 II and No.5 IV.
Neither is striking counterpoint an importunately predominant overall feature in the
symphonies of Schumann, and it is an equally inconspicuous trait with the symphonies of
Schubert. It is not at all unlikely, though, that, on a general basis, some of the chamber music
of these composers inspired Tchaikovskys instrumental music on a general basis, even in his
symphonies.39
We find fugal strategies in the mature symphonic works of Mozart and Haydn; with Mozart
we find an increasingly growing interest in the use of poly-linear techniques during his
development as a composer.40 His two last symphonies are in a class of their own when it
comes to contrapuntal craftsmanship, No.41 being by far the richest in that respect. With
Haydn, we find in general the same increasing tendency towards applying related
techniques.
The general impression in the case of Beethoven is that thematic counterpoint is quite
predominant through his entire symphonic production. Notable examples of imitation-sections
are found in Beethoven. For example, in his Third Symphony we find such episodes
represented in the Scherzo, in the first movement of No.4, and in the scherzo and the Finale of
No.5. Further we find imitation-sections represented in his Sixth Symphony (in the first and
particularly in the second and fourth movements), in No.7 (notably the second and fourth
movements), and to some degree in the scherzo of No.9.
Amongst Tchaikovskys contemporary German symphonists, Brahms and Bruckner, 41 even
though very different in respect of style, are in current and previous literature referred to as
the leading contrapuntists of late Nineteenth Century symphonic music. None of these
39
See, for example, the chapter on the Finale of Tchaikovsky's Fourth Symphony.
though Mozart, taking into account various public or commercial considerations, did at a time moderate or
even nearly neglect contrapuntal strategies in his chamber-music.
41
In the next chapter there is an account of how 'counterpoint' by Brahms (and to some degree Bruckner) is
discussed in current literature on symphonic music.
40
21
composers had finished their first symphonies when Tchaikovsky started to write his first
symphony, which, as it turns out, is highly contrapuntal, and so his attraction towards
contrapuntal solutions could not be inspired by them.
Some notable, though not excessive, counterpoint is found in the first symphonies of
Tchaikovskys fellow countrymen Rimsky-Korsakov, Balakirev and Borodin. These works,
which all highly deserve regular performances, are written practically simultaneously, though
some works (Tchaikovskys first two symphonies among them) were revised later. To the
knowledge of the present author Tchaikovsky did not discuss orchestral counterpoint - or
symphonic composition in general - with these composers while he was composing his First
Symphony.
1.2.2 Possible direct influences

Very few accounts on Tchaikovskys practical use of counterpoint exist, a fact that should not
come as a surprise since Tchaikovsky and counterpoint are not usually associated with each
other. Tchaikovskys lifelong love of Mozart may to some extent explain his contrapuntal
interest, though this is a feature particularly predominant with the earlier masters last
symphonies and part of his chamber music. The interest Tchaikovskys conservatory-teacher
Zaremba took in late Beethoven and Haydn may to some extent have had an impact, though
Tchaikovsky never admitted this, as his relation to his teacher was somewhat ambivalent. 42 In
1862 Bellermann published his work on Palestrina style, yet this had an insignificant impact
on the mainstream of composers in the Nineteenth Century, according to Carl
Dahlhaus.43Nonetheless Bellermann was held in high regard by Zaremba on the St. Petersburg
Conservatory, since Tchaikovsky was driven through the disciplines of strict counterpoint
successively in his first two student years.44
Liszt is sometimes referred to as a composer belonging to the contrapuntal canon of the
romantic era. To what extent Tchaikovsky knew Liszts first symphonic poems in detail by
the time he wrote his first symphony is not perfectly clear, though we know from Laroche that
42
ROSA NEWMARCH: The Life And Letters of Peter Ilich Tchaikovsky by Modest Tchaikovsky (John Lane,
London) pp.46-48
43
44
C ARL D AHLHAUS; Grove Music Online: Counterpoint; The Classical and Romantic eras, access 2008-12.
D AVID B ROWN: Tchaikovsky. The Early Years, 1840-1874. (W. W. Norton & Co. Inc. 1978) p.60
22
It is but fair to state that Liszts symphonic poems () only exercised an insignificant and
ephemeral influence upon Tchaikovsky.45
The composers admiration of Glinka is well known, and though Tchaikovsky refers to
Kamarinskaya as a source of inspiration even with an eye to counterpoint the latter feature
is not very predominant in Glinkas work in terms of thematic counterpoint.46 Yet we
encounter some of the contrapuntal procedures we do find in Glinka already in Tchaikovsky's
First Symphony.47
1.3 Definitions of some selected concepts appearing in this document

1.3.1 Introduction
Hopefully the reader will find the below concepts to be self-explanatory. It is not this writers
intention to try to build a hierarchy of contrapuntal classes or qualities. Rather, continuing
work by several future contributors may gradually widen both a vocabulary and an increasing
interest with regard to contrapuntal writing in the wake of the baroque era. Some terms used
in this document are listed below, meant to represent a concise overview; a fuller
understanding of each concept may only emerge more clearly during the forthcoming
analyses.48Although the forthcoming definitions relate to how aspects to counterpoint are
treated in this particular document, they might hopefully contribute in widening a vocabulary
even on a more general basis.
45
ROSA NEWMARCH: The Life And Letters of Peter Ilich Tchaikovsky by Modest Tchaikovsky (John Lane,
London) p.52
46
Ibid. p.377, pp.563-564
47
The chamber-musical, imitative sections in the overture of Ruslan and Ludmila at m.59 ff and m.153 ff may
serve as examples of poly-linear episodes that may have been points of departure for Tchaikovsky in similar
contrapuntal sections, notably in his First Symphony.
48
Some readers might possibly have wished to extend the limits of what might be regarded as contrapuntal
textures in this text. Although sometimes problematic, limits might after all be helpful in science, even in
musicology, when dealing with issues lying on a borderland between quality and quantity.
23
1.3.2 Poly-linearity ('Construction' is sometimes used synonymously)

Tchaikovskys orchestral style is constructional in sense of having originated from poly-linear
architecture: His constructions are characterized, above all, by their dialectic textural
approaches. This two- or multi-sidedness may be observed via its notable use of
constructional multi-focus as regards
Thematic and semi-thematic counterpoint (i.e. thematically based counterpoint)
Timbral contrast, timbral dialectics
Physical direction/contrary motion
Textural counterpoint
Local counterpoint
These and adjacent poly-linear techniques may be used separately or in combinations, and
often two or more of these concepts may overlap or act together. Thus 'Poly-linearity' may
work as a compressed term for 'Textural dialectics with a graphical/architectonic tendency'.
The term 'Construction' is only used as an alternative when this architecture is dominated by
thematic material.
For operational reasons only ascending or descending layers are basically reckoned to have
potentials for contrapuntal activity from a pure technical point of view. Thus single-tone, flat
signals, for example played by the horns or trumpets, are not regarded as contrapuntally
significant, even when counterpointed to other substantial layers. An exception is made for
symphonic mottos49, either when used in its entity or when one of its motives or cells is used
in original or derived form. If the counterpoints to such a motto are triadic and non-thematic,
or melodically inferior/insignificant in other respects, they are not regarded as interesting
from a contrapuntal angle.
Terms like thematic counterpoint, local counterpoint, and so forth, may need clarification.
Yet one should keep in mind that any thematic reference and its possible counterpoint are
unique events50, while a classification is an attempted generalization.
49
Tchaikovsky only uses this solution to a very limited extent. It is found just sparingly in Symphonies Nos.4 &
5.
50
The bassoon-counterpoint in the slow movement of the First Symphony is a typical borderline case: This idea
is developed extensively, yet as a restricted bassoon-layer throughout. Still it is always subordinated the striking,
highly melodious theme, and just dominates for brief intervals of time, like at mm. 88-9 and 97-8, with an
additional local counterpoint written to it.
24
Consequently one should realize that attempts in classifying counterpoint sometimes just may
be read as such, since they arise out of already existing music and not the other way round.
They are operational steps taken with the intention of make quantitative and qualitative
assertions possible. Yet in this writer's experience current theorists and composers find these
definitions acceptable.
1.3.3 Thematic counterpoint
Thematic (motivic or substantial) counterpoint is the definition of a contrapuntal episode or
situation involving at least two individual voices utilizing thematic/motivic elements or their
derivatives. These voices may originate from the same theme or from different themes. In
practice this will imply the use of two or more thematic ideas simultaneously, or the use of
such elements in overlapping situations. A context where ideas only overlap by one
note/chord - which is a quite common textural overlapping procedure in nineteenth century
orchestral music - is not qualifying for the designation thematic counterpoint;51 the longer
the overlap, the stronger the presence and impact of the thematic counterpoint.
Traditionally speaking, a common example of thematic counterpoint is the fugue or fugato
and music labelled as polyphonic. In this document counterpoint always refers to the craft or
craftsmanship as such, while 'polyphony' is just one of several types of textures which may
result from contrapuntal work; most often understood as imitative types of textures. Elements
(motives or cells) taking part in a contrapuntal process, and which are derived or directly
quoted from a theme, are characterized as substantial, thematic or motivic contrapuntal
elements.
Thematic counterpoint may very well serve as an intensification of motivic work to quote
Dahlhaus, thus standing out as a very commendable developmental procedure. Thematic
counterpoint makes the music focused, yet the textural fabric as such may vary from quite
open, laidback textures to multi-thematic excess. Hence this is not to say that thematically
based counterpoint is automatically brilliant from a technical point of view or ditto interesting
in a cognitive perspective, although this might often be the case.
In brief, substantial, thematic counterpoint is the realization of one thematically rooted event
written as a counterpoint to another thematically rooted event.
Sprung out from an urge for linguistic variety, the wording thematic (/motivic) counterpoint
may be substituted with substantial counterpoint.
51
Though such incidents might possibly give the listener the impression of being contrapuntal
25
The majority of examples in this document, particularly in Symphonies 2 - 6, display thematic

counterpoint. Yet there are also obvious examples in No.1; Exx.1 I 12, 1 I 21-25, 1 IV 11-13
and 1 IV 17-20, although here we also encounter borderline examples like Ex.1 I 19.
1.3.4 Local counterpoint

Local counterpoint describes a contrapuntal context where only one of the parts involved is or is derived from - a thematic (substantial) element.
This may be the type of counterpoint we may sometimes refer to as counter-melody or
discantus. An extremely elegant bass-line can be contrapuntally significant. If there are no or
inferior thematic qualities attached to it, it is a 'local' counterpoint. Yet if it might, even in
theory, be associated with thematic material, it will be classified as 'semi-thematic' if no other
thematic characteristics than the actual line is involved52 (See 1.3.5). One may with some
justification claim that there is a contrapuntal aspect connected to almost everything that
happens within an orchestral texture. But in order to deserve a contrapuntal label a layer
should normally be architectonically significant compared to its surrounding layers, most
often with a comparatively distinct contour. Some rigid rule or definition here would probably
prove to be problematic in the long run; better then, probably, to operate with layers that are
characterized as more or less contrapuntally striking, alternatively to operate with borderline
cases.
Tchaikovsky's counterpoints are for the most part thematic or semi-thematic by nature.
Instances of local counterpoint are shown in Ex. 1 II 1, 1 II 3, yet even here one is struck with
hints of thematic relevance, although not dominance.
A peculiar type of borderline case may hypothetically occur where a section containing local
counterpoint recurs, but where the elements turn out to be rewritten/further developed. By
definition it is still a local counterpoint, though it may become a question of definition
whether or when the local counterpoint actually gains status as a new theme, an outcome that
is not very much likely to happen.
When a local element counterpoints a thematic element during a substantial part of a
movement, being it slightly varied or drastically reshaped, this non-thematic approach is most
often referred to as textural counterpoint (see 1.3.10).
52
If the theme as such should happen to be just a line - or just possess linear qualities - the mentioned
counterpoint will, at least in theory, be 'thematic'.
26
1.3.5 Semi-thematic counterpoint (Stylized counterpoint)

Some themes may mainly or in part be constructed from arch-typed graphical lines in
stepwise ascending or descending motion. If such a stereotyped line occurs as counterpoint to
more characteristic thematic material, it is by definition thematic, but the overall universality
characterizing such counterpoints reduces their melodic significance or distinctiveness, and
they are thus most often labelled 'semi-thematic'. This is not to say that this type of
counterpoint demands lesser degree of contrapuntal skill than other contrapuntal solutions,
particularly if the line moves exclusively by stepwise motion, which is usually the case with
Tchaikovsky's stylizations. None the less, contrapuntal lines, even chromatic lines in contrary
motion, might with some justification be regarded as established procedures, even
stereotypes, within segments of Nineteenth Century music. The reader will find that
Tchaikovsky, in practically all of his symphonies, is particularly fond of writing this type of
counterpoint to almost any theme, regardless of the properties belonging to the original
thematic construction in question.
Semi-thematic registrations in this document are only made for counterpoints exceeding one
measure, unless the thematic relevance, like simultaneous inversion, is obvious53. Usually a
copied measure involving this procedure will not be regarded as significant.54
The denotations by which semi-thematic counterpoints are labelled are rooted in the themes,
yet very often the stylizations are adapted to or fused with other materials, and thus might
seem at least equally related to the latter.
Looking historically upon fugatos and fugues, linear motives may develop into semi-thematic
lines or turn to other less thematically striking manifestations. In such cases the entire fugato,
based on a defined theme/subject, is nonetheless labelled 'thematic counterpoint' throughout.
In order to create stepwise lines to any given theme, the process quite often involves usage of
chromaticism. The result of this approach stimulates or challenges at least two perceptual
polarities in the listening process; the expectedness that a stepwise line will continue over
more than just a few notes and the unexpected harmonies provoked by it.
Sometimes the term 'stylized counterpoint' is used. 'Linear counterpoint' might possibly have
been a better alternative, were it not for the fact that this characterization is normally used for
corresponding contrapuntal approaches appearing well into the twentieth century.
53
54
A minimum number of notes might have been an equally viable alternative.

An exemplification of this kind of copying is found in Symphony No.5 II, mm.39-41.
27
It is extremely important to stress out that counterpoints in some examples might theoretically
speaking have been classified in alternative ways, and thus a term like 'semi-thematic
stylization' is more accurate in most situations, and lies at the core of future use of the terms
'semi-thematic' and 'stylized'.
Two stylized layers moving in the same direction are not regarded as contrapuntally
significant, even though the result might sometimes be effective55. In the event of two nonthematic lines counterpointing each other, such textures will usually not qualify for labels like
'(semi)thematic' or 'local' counterpoints. And, needless to say, neither will simultaneously
layered broken chords, unless they are being blessed by a particularly original structure56. A
situation in which a layer consisting of broken chords is written in ideal technical
counterpoint to a contrasting theme is a viable exception, the contrast indicating predominant
linearity (as opposed to broken chords).
In the case of the Finale of the Second Symphony, the linear elongations of the thematic
material are in most cases so obvious that the lines are classified as thematic.
One might possibly ask if we were better off without this term. Although no classification is
completely unproblematic, the present author would clearly miss this concept if excluded.
Semi-thematic counterpoint is demonstrated in Exx.1 IV 2-6 and 1 IV 8-9.
1.3.6 Textural field (texture)
This expression defines a delimited, congruent scoring approach. A score page may depict
this denotation quite well, though the length of a textural field may vary considerably. The
term texture is mainly used for short. It may be homophonic or highly contrapuntal. This
document is above all concerned with the constructional, contrapuntal aspects related to
textures - at the expense of timbre - although this specification, like most simplifications, may
not be read too literally.57 The majority of textural fields accounted for in this document
deserve the designation 'poly-linear' construction, or just 'construction' for short, since
55
Symphony No.4 IV, mm.260ff provides a telling example.

This Brahms'ian approach goes for triadically built thematic materials counterpointing each other, or triadic
thematic material counterpointing other triadic material.
57
Tchaikovsky's use of timbral contrast is an extremely important device in the majority of his textures. Even
though the timbral issue is far from central in this document, the majority of examples clearly demonstrate the
importance of timbral cultivation in Tchaikovsky's constructions, and this approach is given special focus during
the examination of Symphony o.1, movement III.
56
28
thematic and/or semi-thematic counterpoint dominates the respective textures. In the future
one might possibly wish to make grades between monophony and extreme polyphony.
1.3.7 Textural layer ('layer'/segment)
A textural layer refers to a specific role attached to an instrument or group of instruments
within a textural field.
A textural layer may or may not be of substantial, contrapuntal importance, and may or may
not be thematically based. In this document the term is mostly replaced with 'layer' for short.
1.3.8 Textural element
A textural element is a term related to any definable, delimited unit acting within a textural
field. This element may be found within one or more (all) layers. It may or may not appear as
a thematic element, though this document is mainly concerned with thematic elements, in the
shape of cells or motives, above all cells/motives used for contrapuntal purpose.
1.3.9 Textural Counterpoint: Textural Strategy or Textural Factor

The term 'Textural counterpoint' refers to an architectonically orientated procedure based on
either a clearly definable gestalt or a definable, recurring principle, partly characterizing but
not necessarily forming the movement. When carried out persistently by the composer, this
principle may appear as a 'textural theme'.
'Textural Strategy' is a specification of the above term, referring to a contrapuntally based
scoring procedure or scoring principle made possible by a non-thematic motive or cell which
is traceable and recurring throughout the movement, for the most part counterpointing
thematic material. One might alternatively perceive such a procedure as a textural theme,
partly responsible for the construction of a movement. The march from the Pathetique
Symphony is a representative example where large parts of one movement are designed from
a clear textural strategy, where the textural counterpoint tends toward obtaining thematic
importance (see Exx.6 29-37). With Tchaikovsky there is usually a thematically based
contrapuntal approach associated with this procedure, although the borders between thematic
and non-thematic material are sometimes blurred, as is the case with the zigzag triplets
recurring in the Third Symphony.
29
Thus it is a rather relative term, and in cases where the term Textural strategy feels
exaggerated or too pretentious, one might in less conspicuous textures alternatively - or
preferably - utilize the term Textural tendency.
An even less thematic or just vaguely thematic layer, constructed mostly on a 'textural graph'
instead of a cell or motive, is labelled 'Textural factor'; in this document most clearly
represented by the opening movement of the First Symphony. It is also present in some of the
composer's remaining symphonic movements, yet above all in some of his orchestral pieces,
like Capriccio Italien and Marche Slave58. In an orchestral work the term 'Textural factor' is
used synonymously with 'Orchestral factor'. From a contrapuntal view this approach may
seem less interesting than thematically based strategies: The latter are favoured by
Tchaikovsky, although he clearly demonstrates notable constructional possibilities of the
former in the first symphony, see, for example, Exx.1 I 1-9. Yet in rare cases there are
moments when a textural factor develops, and take on local, quasi-melodic proportions, like,
for example, in Symphony No.2 II. Since such incidents are not rooted in a defined theme
they cannot be classified as formally 'thematic' or 'semi-thematic', even though a textural
counterpoint suggests a long-term involvement.
The difference between textural 'strategy' and 'factor' is not always striking, and thus it is
neither necessary nor desirable to make a big issue out of how to distinguish between them.
Both procedures are in rare cases seen "out on their own", not counterpointing thematic
material. Yet contrapuntal aspects are in general clearly associated with both procedures, thus
Textural Counterpoint is used as a generic term.59
1.3.10 Texture-confined counterpoint

This term relates to a textural field wherein non-thematic material (for example texturally
strategic material) counterpoints other non-thematic material. Tchaikovsky normally avoids
this type of texturing.
58
The rushing, arch-formed or ascending/descending lines in these works contrast the overall flat, tremolando or
signal-like layers that so often accompany the thematic material of the First Symphony, movement I.
59
Since there is no final review as regards textural counterpoint in the thesis, the recurring, predominant textural
lines counterpointing the theme regularly in Symphony No.1 III is registered as local c.p. From Symphony No.2
onwards textural counterpoint is mostly ignored for the benefit of thematic, semi-thematic and local
counterpoint.
30
1.3.11 Motivic textural transfer (abbreviated to Textural Transfer)

This term describes a situation where a motive or cell moves from one register to another and
most often is given a new role in the new textural field, forming a new textural layer. This
approach can be observed particularly in the last three symphonies, see for example, Ex.4 I 56 and 4 I 11-12.
If the register-change is insignificant, but where the motive or cell, nonetheless, changes
behaviour by shaping a renewed, distinct, separate textural layer, it is usually labelled
'imprint', meaning that a recently derived thematic element in one texture leaves a substantial
imprint on the next (see 1.3.12).
1.3.12 Imprint
This term is used to describe that a thematic cell or motive used subordinately in one specific
phrase or paragraph is used for developmental purpose and given a more central role in the
ensuing phrase or paragraph. Sometimes the new role is so dramatically different from the
preceding that one may suspect some commentators miss out on the connection between them
- and thus fail to recognize an important developmental feature with Tchaikovsky, a
procedure by which the composer may completely transform his material.60 If this procedure
also implies change of register, it is referred to as 'textural transfer' (see 1.3.11).
1.3.13 Physical direction (direction)
This term calls for an alertness with regard to the actual ascending or descending movement
(direction) of a textural layer, thus distinguished from other types of psychological
direction, the latter determined by, for example, seamless dynamic change, diminuendos,
acceleration, etc.
60
M.361 ff of Symphony No.4, movement I, may serve as a good example: A Motto-motive culminates during a
long, dramatic passage and is used in its augmented yet otherwise original gestalt in the calm pastorale that
follows. A. Peter Brown labels the new passage as "new material" (see the chapter dealing with the Fourth
Symphony).
31
1.4 Some comments about the score examples

1.4.1 Presentation and intention
Assuming that "a (note)-picture speaks more than a thousand words" it has been this author's
intention to write crucial analytical references directly into the written music and thus make
Tchaikovsky's technique stand forth without the need of two extensive, additional texts.
Hence much effort has been invested in an attempt to make the central objective of this
document as easily accessible as possible by way of self-explanatory examples.
Most often the examples demonstrate just fractions of the construction in question. A more
accurate record is rendered in the Appendix.
Some examples are complete, some are reduced and some characterized as 'score extracts',
meaning that inferior parts or layers in the score are excluded61. At the same time score
examples provide verifiable, indisputable proof of the musicological findings in question,
something which, unfortunately, has not always been the case when it comes to assessing
Tchaikovsky's symphonic output in previous musicography.
In order to render a reasonable picture of Tchaikovsky's scores already from the outset, they
are represented nearly in full in the first symphonies. Since music examples are crucial,
serving both as demonstrations and, not the least: proofs of verifiability, they are, as a
consequence, numerous. Thus, limitations of space lead to increased focus on contrapuntal
aspects of the score as the examination proceeds, while peripheral textural layers are being
left out.
1.4.2 Abbreviations used in the score reductions
The following abbreviations are used in the forthcoming examples
doubl.: doubling(s) /doubled by
nat.: natura (sounding pitch)
not.: as notated (transposed)
perm.: permuted/permutation
supp.: support / supported by (I.e. some doubled notes are not in unison, but sound octave
above or below the quoted instrument)
Ordinary (Arabic) digits in the woodwind parts refer to the respective player,
61
These types of parts and layers are mainly of timbrally supportive nature, such as layer doublings or timpani or
percussion layers.
32
Roman digits in the brass or strings likewise. Thus "2." in the flute part refers to the second
flute; "III" in the horns refers to the third horn.
1.5 Analysis
1.5.1 Thematic and motivic classification used in music examples
In order to gradually become acquainted with Tchaikovsky's thematically based counterpoint,
Symphonies Nos.1-3, are more subjected to detailed motivic classification than the last three.
Movements in sonata form have their themes and motives classified hierarchically. Thus, for
example, 1A2b is equivalent with:
1: main area
1A: The first theme of the main area (sometimes referred to as 'the main theme')
1A2: The first theme's second significant melodic/thematic ingredient
1A2b: The second motive of the above thematic ingredient - and so forth
If an area has no subthemes or sub-thematic ingredient, the second cipher is skipped, and the
letter can be small instead of capital.
A ' mark, for example 1A2b', refers to a permutation of the motive or theme in question, or
can alternatively refer to a layer-construction stemming from the respective permutation. This
mark is not necessarily utilized if the motivic permutation is insignificant or easily
recognizable.
Several marks, usually made inside a layer (', '', ''' etc.), refer to different kinds of motivic
permutations, for example in respect of contour, inside that specific layer. Normally the
reference/classification alone will make the mark self-explanatory; in that case the
permutation-marks are left out.
Usually only themes and motives which are put into use within notable contrapuntal contexts
are classified. Indirectly this practice indicates, to some extent, why some motives are labelled
the way they are, and why some are not labelled at all. Motivic divisions and subdivisions are
only defined in order to become operational analytical elements; quite often alternative
classifications might have been equally suitable as the actual chosen selections.
Deviations of the above descriptions may occur if they seem well suited for a particular theme
or movement, as long as they, presumably, are easily perceived by the reader.
33
Previous commentators sometimes have different views on theme classification in

Tchaikovskys works, particularly when it comes to defining a specific material as being of
subsidiary, closing or transitory character. Such issues are seldom debated in this thesis.
Music is art, and art should in some way give room for some personal interpretation. Yet
although different views should sometimes be acceptable, they should represent the exception,
not the rule. That said, not seldom Tchaikovsky's thematic usage is so versatile that alternative
classifications - or focus - might have been possible. Although alternative shades of
classification etc. are sometimes possible, the actual counterpoint is nonetheless central.
1.5.2 Analysis in context
During the analyses of No.1 I & IV and No.2 I textural, thematic and semi-thematic
counterpoints are treated separately. Consequently the reader may hopefully benefit from this
segregation in the process of becoming better acquainted with the respective concepts. On the
other hand, such a division may lead to a poorer understanding of the continuous development
of each movement. Thus the remaining movements are, by and large, treated and analyzed as
the movement unfolds.
1.6 Extent of contrapuntal activity within each movement
Significant future research is needed when it comes to defining and classifying the
contrapuntal aspects of a piece of music, but the present author nonetheless feels obliged to
determine the extent of constructional dialectics within these scores, particularly as regards
thematically based counterpoint. Such records, though, should be regarded as slightly
approximate, since borderline cases are most likely to occur in almost any work of the
symphonic repertoire.62For example; if a semi-thematic or local counterpoint lasts for just
about one measure or less, the measure is not registered in this record, while some might
possibly have wished to include it, e.g. No.3 I; mm.202-3 and 204-5.63 It has already been
commented that the borderlines between semi-thematic and thematic counterpoints are
sometimes blurred. Thus a term suggesting doubt or two-sidedness feels appropriate.
62
Mm.33-43 of No.3 I illustrate a problem at hand: do the two bassoons represent thematic, semi-thematic or
local counterpoint, or is the contrapuntal aspect too insignificant to be worthy of mention? Exemplary partwriting may often coincide with stylized or thematic counterpoints. The harmonic, downward stepwise motion
characterizing these measures are not read as sufficiently interesting from a contrapuntal viewpoint in the present
examination; a 'semi-local' contrapuntal labeling might possibly have been viable in corresponding cases.
63
Most often, a borderline case is left unregistered when occurring in an otherwise homophonic paragraph.
34
Although one probably has to accept that problems related to defining definition-borders and
handling borderline-cases at some stage may always exist, this issue is, fortunately, relatively
seldom on the agenda during the actual textural analyzing. Thus it does not interfere
particularly much with what finally stands as a fair record of the contrapuntal activity related
to the respective works. Usually it is not particularly problematic to define Tchaikovsky's
counterpoints. Parts of the second and third movements of No.3 are exceptions, mostly due to
fluctuant or vaguely defined material of tertiary character.
Sometimes one might encounter textures containing three or four simultaneous thematic
and/or semi-thematic layers. Such stretches are only registered as one contrapuntal event.
There might also be doubt whether a measure at the end of a contrapuntal texture should be
included in the total contrapuntal record if it contains only the last note of a phrase. Normally
such a measure is not taken into consideration. If such a texture recurs, the measure in
question might be registered once.
In the event of a thematic inversion counterpointing a theme/motive twice, this solution is
usually only rendered once.64Even though being a standard part-writing procedure, stepwise
bass-lines over at least two measures, alternatively minimum one hexachord, are usually
registered as semi-thematic or local counterpoints in this document.
Under most circumstances only the actual contrapuntal stretches are part of the contrapuntal
record. In practice this means that in the event of a fugue, the first entry is not included in the
overview.
If a contrapuntal stretch suiting a specific classification is interrupted by occasional single
measures viable for other labels, the primary label is kept for the entire stretch.
1.7 Related problems for future discussion and research

The reason for including this chapter already at this stage and not at the end of the dissertation
relates to methodological problems the present author faced already before embarking on his
project. Until now there has not existed a sufficiently applicable theoretical fundament
relating to all contrapuntal aspects to the symphonic output of the Nineteenth Century.
64
Symphony No.1 III, m.380ff may serve as an example.
35
1.7.1 Counterpoint, research and verifiability

Theoretically speaking, the actual contrapuntal length, i.e. the period within which two or
more substantial ideas appear simultaneously, may indicate one quality credited to the
contrapuntal work in question. For example, brief simultaneous thematic inversions, lasting
up to just three or four pitches, are regarded contrapuntally inferior in this document, also
when repeated or sequenced (i.e.; both layers having the same phrase-lengths).65 Yet other
qualities are equally important, qualities which are not automatically subject to immediate
evaluation, such as the melodic qualities of each layer, rhythmic and harmonic implications,
even the total textural handling. Whether a system encompassing every aspect of a
contrapuntal work is something we should wish to acquire or not, is yet an unanswered
question. Possibly we may never wish to pursue such a goal, the pitfalls being obvious,
envisaging just another rigid and imperfect system, incapable of capturing all human qualities
constituting a piece of art. Even so; the central discussion of this document, pointing to vital
aspects of Tchaikovskys work, indirectly indicates that the present-day comprehension and
use of contrapuntal music feels incomplete and unsatisfactory. When looking into previous
writings on this subject, a search for more verifiable and precise discussion seems long
overdue. On such grounds this document may hopefully be at least a minor contribution.
In the expectation of finding in the future a possible theoretical framework from which we
may deduct qualities attached to any contrapuntal work, we must abstain from a much-needed
tool by which we may determine or at least suspect the challenge or difficulty implied in the
writing of specific types of counterpoints to specific themes. We should thus keep in mind
during the forthcoming examination that the characteristics belonging to different themes do
not only demand different possible solutions; they may represent a significant difference in
respect of compositional challenge as regards contrapuntal writing, depending on the
complexity and characteristics of the various themes. Today an analytical approach serving as
a quality assurance in the attempt of referring to a contrapuntal canon is practically nonexistent. If we in the future would wish
to use descriptions like contrapuntist or
contrapuntal with greater conviction, there is a vast amount of theoretic research waiting to
be carried out. Yet despite of this, as we all know, some composers are pronounced
contrapuntists with the utmost ease.
65
The analysis of Symphony No.6 contains an example of contrapuntally inferior thematic inversion at the
statement of the subsidiary theme of movement I (Symphony No.6, Ex.6 I 8, trumpets at mm.243-45).
36
1.7.2 Triads in contrapuntal context

Sometimes, although rare, a non-triadic element develops into triadically built variants or as a
variation being part of a triad. The present author feels it is more consistent to exclude all
triadically based material counterpointing other triadically based material from being
contrapuntally significant, without making exceptions. This view is in line with Brahms's
comment concerning the First Symphony of Richard Strauss (see chapter 1.8.2), even though
far from all aspects to this problem area seem sufficiently debated as concerns counterpoint in
the Nineteenth Century.
1.7.3 Harmonic progression
Evaluating the harmonic surface in relation to thematic ingredients within a contrapuntal
texture is but one of several challenges music theory and analysis might be faced with in
future research. This document does not go any further in this respect than do related texts
(see 1.8.2). If, in general literature, one often gets the impression that counterpoints usually, at
least to some extent, seem adjusted to fit into a harmonic mould, the opposite is quite
frequently the case in Tchaikovsky, who is often able to make stylized constructions
apparently completely regardless of the qualities of the theme in question. In order to create
such lines, chromaticism often comes into play; the re-harmonizations might appear
refreshingly and at times astonishingly new and revitalized, mostly, though, by means of
rather standard procedures. Consequently, in most cases raised bass notes are usually leadingtones, alternatively raised submediantic thirds or augmented fifths, while flattened notes are
usually dominant-sevenths or diminished fifths, appearing within brief harmonic excursions
or modulatory paragraphs. Swift parallel mode changes occur regularly, in order to create
sufficient harmonic and metric propulsion. On examination one will - on an overall basis sense slightly varied harmonic approaches as regards contrapuntal paragraphs in Brahms (se
Chapter 1.8.2) and Tchaikovsky (see Part 2), although harmony per se is not under
examination in the present texturally and thematically oriented document. In the case of
Tchaikovsky, thematic counterpoint is most often used within offensive modulatory passages.
37
1.8 Nineteenth century counterpoint, as expressed in current analytic literature

on symphonic music
1.8.1 Introduction
General studies in poly-linear Nineteenth Century orchestral texture and orchestral
counterpoint are surprisingly few.66 Some literature on the subject exists, though these
writings do not focus to any notable extent on textural strategies. 67-68 Particularly scarce are
studies of thematically based counterpoint within a symphonic context, thus characteristics
like counterpoint or contrapuntal are for the most part used en passent in the majority of
analytical texts on symphonic literature. Carl Dahlhaus article on counterpoint in the classical
and romantic eras may serve as a suitable point of departure before proceeding further into a
more specific discussion on the subject.69
The influence exerted by Bach on Chopin and Mendelssohn, Schumann and Brahms should
not be sought solely in fugues and fughettas ()
() it became logical to characterize the development section by an intensification of
motivic work to the point of fugal technique and thus mark it out as distinct from the
exposition and the recapitulation. In Beethoven's late quartets, in Brahms and even in
Liszt, fugal technique was in effect displayed as a consequence of thematic working.
Dahlhaus's observation that fugal techniques were not solely found in fugues and fughettas is
crucial, yet in spite of this, few commentators take into account the contrapuntal aspect in
their analyzing to a notable degree. However, an examination of any symphony of Brahms, for
example, reveals in fact no extensive fugal paragraphs at all.70 Referring to Schubert and
subsidiary themes of Bruckners symphonies, the article writer moves on mentioning the idea
of a cantabile counterpoint or a contrapuntal cantabile style, before continuing to stress the
contrapuntal aspect of some of Brahmss bass writing. Yet one may not automatically
associate thematic development with extensive contrapuntal work. Dahlhauss article
encompasses important aspects, yet several others call for substantial future research, which
some of his paragraphs in Grove, at least indirectly, demonstrate. Counterpoint, in
Dahlhaus's view, is thus confined to the more traditional conceptions covering the term,
66
Books on orchestration are for the most part concerned with timbral aspects, instrument range and playing
techniques. They are in general more concerned with materiality than poly-linear construction.
67
68
69
70
See ANTONY HOPKINS: Sounds of Music, J.M. Dent & Sons Ltd. (London 1982) and
J ONATHAN DUNSBY: Music & Letters, Vol. 70, No. 1 (Feb., 1989): Considerations of Texture, pp. 46-57
Grove Music Online: Counterpoint; The Classical and Romantic eras (2008-13)
In the case of Liszt, the explanation is obviously applicable to some of his symphonic poems.
38
probably because they are those most easily detectable and also easiest to handle within
analytical discourse.
1.8.2 The counterpoint of Johannes Brahms, as discussed in two anthologies
Very few commentators have made much notice of Tchaikovsky's counterpoint until just
recently, but when such mention appears, his counterpoint is met with considerable
skepticism, as seen later. This chapter attempts to explore in what way 'counterpoint', as a
qualitative phenomenon, is discussed in recent analytical anthologies of late nineteenth
century symphonic music. The number and frequency of references to counterpoint, together
with the way actual references are described, are crucial factors if we want to put
Tchaikovsky's contrapuntal work into perspective. This paragraph just deals with how
'counterpoint' and related wordings are applied in the actual analyzes, with no pretensions of
discussing the quality of Brahms's work as such.
Among Tchaikovsky's contemporaries, Brahms and Bruckner are usually held in high esteem
when 'counterpoint' is on the agenda. Consequently, one might expect to find extensive
documentation and plenty of examples demonstrating this phenomenon in current
musicography. Yet the fact is that such examples are far from numerous.
In The Nineteenth Century Symphony there is little mention of counterpoint even in the
chapter on Brahms's First Symphony, which is in itself remarkable if we assume that
counterpoint is such a pivotal phenomenon in Brahms's technique.
The author most correctly observes the "forceful fugato based on the rising motive from
measures 6-7" in the development of No.2; a masterly poly-motivic/rhythmic explosion.71 The
author's notion of a "complex discourse" corresponds well to this excerpt, while a similar
characterization may seem too pretentious for m.224 ff:
"(...) the simultaneous return of the neighbor-note idea and the choir of trombones"
might possibly make us believe that there is some kind of textural complexity involved, yet in
reality the truth is as simple as this: "The trombones play the neighbor-note idea". The
fragment represents inferior contrapuntal challenge to the composer, possessing just
complementing and barely overlapping elements. The commentator continues his praise of
Brahms's development in the following way:
71
m. 204 ff
39
Tension is maintained as the music builds to a climax beginning in measure 246, where the
horn theme (itself now briefly in 3/2) and neighbor-note figure (in 6/8) are soon set off against
a new bass in 3/4.72
The above comment is particularly flattering, taking into account that the fragment, later
copied to the mediant, is but a stable G major chord, with absolutely no harmonic progression
involved.73 Lack of harmonic propulsion is, by the way, a characteristic feature of the "real
climax (...) at measure 282" with its "terrifying rising third".74
The author also makes an issue out of the "genuine cross-pollination (...) by combining the
descending third-chain and ascending passacaglia subject".75 Yet this simultaneity is achieved
via contrary motion on broken chords; see Brahms's comment on Strauss. This fact is, though,
no discredit to Brahms; the combination produces nearly seamless harmonic propulsion.
The author becomes even more ecstatic about an episode at mm. l69ff, which he describes as
"... particularly noteworthy on account of its "microscopic" detail; here Brahms not only
combines a two-voice canon on a forceful variation of the first phrase (with the descending
third filled in and the ascending sixth displaced by an expressive appoggiatura), a two-voice
inversion canon based on the turning figure from measure 9, and a firmly articulated ascending
scale, but then repeats the whole rich combination in triple counterpoint."76
Brahms's unquestionable ability for maintaining motivic focus throughout his movements is
one thing; the author's assumption that this particular passage represents a major contrapuntal
achievement is another. Combining a three-note stepwise cell and a turning figure (in triple
counterpoint) may work splendidly for developmental purpose, but represents only a limited
contrapuntal challenge, particularly when kept within a one-measure long sequential pattern,
based on the circle of fifths. In our dealing with Tchaikovsky's thematic counterpoint a
variation like this is not given contrapuntal credit at all, but regarded as a complementary
texture. The contrapuntal achievement is further reduced by the fact that two of the layers are
linked together with just one note in octave(s), and all layers/motives are segregated by
72
B RODBECK, D AVID : Brahms in The Nineteenth Century Symphony, p.240

The problem at hand was even brought to the fore by Brahms himself: Commenting on Richard Strauss's
Symphony in F he underlined that Strauss's simultaneity of triadic themes "was (still) not counterpoint", as
Strauss seemed to believe (Brahms's opinion was further commented upon by Strauss's father in a letter to his
son on 26.th October 1885). It is, though, highly important to distinguish between textures which involve only
triadically based themes (with, for example, occasional passing-tones), thus representing inferior technical
challenge, and textures which are constructed as a mixture of triadic and linear thematic layers.
74
B RODBECK, D AVID : Brahms in The Nineteenth Century Symphony, p.240
75
ibid., p.256
76
ibid., p.257
73
40
pauses. The "inversion" emerges from the fact that the three-note turning cell turns either up
or down.
The enthusiastic author mentions the six-note long invertible counterpoint at the onset of the
scherzo (mm. 1-2, 35-36, slightly varied at 3-4, 37-38)77and correctly says about measures 33
ff. of the finale that
"(...) Brahms removes the subject to the bass and introduces a surging countermelody in the
violins that includes two references to the third chain"
One might alternatively state that the countermelody is a measure-by-measure gestalt based
on broken chords.
The last mention of counterpoint comes with the "thundering canon" in variations 39-40. This
canon in close imitation is to be sure a powerful moment; the counterpoint as such is once
again enabled via the successive melodic third-relations originating from the symphony's
opening.78
Thus, in general terms it must be fair to say that mention of contrapuntal activity
demonstrated or rendered in the symphonic music of Brahms, is not overwhelming in this
anthology. True, the article does not intend to demonstrate counterpoint in particular, but
having in mind Brahms's reputation as contrapuntist one might expect this feature to be more
dominating, even dominating to the extent of permeating the composer's scores.
Neither does A. Peter Brown reveal particularly numerous incidents of noted counterpoint in
the symphonic music of Brahms in his extensive and impressive dealing with "The
Symphonic Repertoire". Yet, when the author touches upon the subject, one may at times be
struck with the way characterizations are dimensioned when correlated to the actual
contrapuntal work:
Though there are no fugal expository sections in the entire symphony, the exposition and the
development reveal the depth of Brahms's contrapuntal thinking in the seemingly effortless
combinations of thematic material. The development itself commences with a quickly aborted
canon on 1P followed by 1P in augmentation against something possibly related to 2S (m.197)
or the latter part of 1P (...)79
Since the author does not demonstrate or specify more clearly "the depth of Brahms's
contrapuntal thinking" in Symphony No.1/1, one must presume that the associated "quickly
aborted canon" stands as a noteworthy example. Yet, this particular spot possesses absolutely
77
ibid., p.260
ibid., p.262
79
A. P ETER B ROWN: The Symphonic Repertoire Volume IV (Indiana University Press, Bloomington 2003) p.57
78
41
no harmonic progression whatsoever. But equally worthy of notice is the fact that in contrast
to the respective author's paragraphs on Tchaikovsky, he expresses no disappointment vis-vis the fact that Brahms's imitation does not "come into fruition", a possible regret which is
groundless in either case: the author does not explain why some imitative passages should
develop into fugatos and others not.
The commentator speaks positively of the horn when dealing with the opening measures of
the third movement, which "provides a counterline moving in contrary motion"80. In our later
examinations of Tchaikovsky's counterpoint, the above-mentioned four quarter-notes would
be regarded to be rather insignificant taking into account Tchaikovsky's overall striking partwriting.
Later the Finale is praised, among other things, for its "latent contrapuntal potential of the
material(s)"81. But despite this assumption, the realization of this contrapuntal potential is just
demonstrated in a brief glimpse to the reader; by measures 2-3, written to standard invertible
counterpoint at mm. 13-14.
The author also makes mention of "the contrapuntal orientation of a canon" at m.19782, which
is in reality the turn-motive in sequence, the imitation of which produces parallel sixths and/or
thirds. It is difficult to imagine how thematic counterpoint could come into use in a more
unsophisticated and plain fashion than this, and thus the present writer would have been much
surprised if Brahms himself would have associated this passage with notable counterpoint.
True, the simultaneous return of two thematic elements at m.302 is noteworthy83, yet Brahms
once again turns to his predilection for triadic, broken chords.
This solution is also evident in the second movement at a celebrated moment from m.49 ff,
but not to the same extent. On a general basis, the movement is lavishly supplied with
counterpointing thematic materials. The contrapuntal fields, though, are usually shorter than
what is the case with Tchaikovsky, as seen later. About the scherzo, the author once again
refers on the one hand to "artifices of counterpoint"84, although on the other hand there are no
specific references to such artifices.
There are but inferior accounts of contrapuntal activity in the Third and Fourth Symphonies,
yet in advance of his dealings with the Finale of the Fourth, the author mentions not only "the
80
Ibid., p.60
Ibid., p.64
82
Ibid., p.71
83
Ibid., p.72
84
Ibid., p.77
81
42
contrapuntal fabrics" of the first and third movements, but even the "deft contrapuntal
fabrics".85 The reader may with justification claim that Brown does not necessarily need to
account for every presumption made. Yet why, instead, demonstrate to us the thematic
materials and their respective keys, which have been explained to us time after time since the
late Nineteenth Century? One might have wished that the notion of "deft contrapuntal fabrics"
might have resulted in at least a few noteworthy examples.
Even though Bruckner is often acknowledged for his contrapuntal talent, the chapters from
"The Nineteenth Century Symphony" dealing with him do not demonstrate the composer's
counterpoint in much detail, despite the fact that he is regarded as "the continent's unrivaled
master (of) virtuoso counterpoint".86
'Counterpoint' is a term used more superficially that one might expect in A. Peter Brown's
quite so extensive dealing with Bruckner. On pp. 173-4, 176, 192-3 and 208-987 contrapuntal
activity is merely hinted at. Only after approx. fifty pages do we face more thorough
information on the subject:
Bruckner's themes are often designed for the application of contrapuntal techniques. In the
1880 development we are made well aware of them: the components of P are treated to
imitation and inversion; S is augmented and its counterpoint is inverted.88
Since "Bruckner's themes are often designed for the application of contrapuntal techniques",
some readers might possibly be disappointed to find that notable manifestations of such
techniques are not demonstrated even once during the fifty introductory pages covering five
different works.
Thus, the problem does not lie with Bruckner - or Brahms, for that matter - sooner with some
of their commentators, who do not sufficiently demonstrate in what way the actual
contrapuntal "depth" of these composers manifests itself. The above commentators often tell
us that the two masters are contrapuntists in the front rank; they do not demonstrate
convincingly why they are.
85
Ibid., p.110
P ARKANY, J. STEPHEN, Bruckner in The Nineteenth Century Symphony, ed. D. Kern Holoman, (Schirmer
Books,London, 1997), p.215
87
A. P ETER B ROWN: The Symphonic Repertoire Volume IV (Indiana University Press, Bloomington 2008)
86
88
Ibid., p.221
43
2 Constructional texturing in Tchaikovsky's Six Symphonies

2.1.1.1 Symphony No.1 in g-minor, Winter (Day)dreams , opus 13,
final version 1874 (original version composed 1866)
The creation process of this symphony is known as the most problematic of all Tchaikovskys
works. He was so absorbed with this project that he was afraid he might die before having
completed it. Working day and night he suffered from hallucinations and physical illness, his
doctor warning him to be one step from insanity.89
The reception of the symphony from the premiere until today has been varied, though the
world premiere of the original version was on the whole negative90. An anonymous critic in
the St. Petersburg press is a noted exception. He was surprised at the symphonys poor
reception by the audience, saying the symphony had its undoubted merits, being melodious
and excellently scored.91
Several biographers on Tchaikovsky, like Strutte92 and Holden93, make rather insufficient
mention of Ts three initial symphonies, while Warrack94 has spotted a fugue in the Finale of
No.1, though failing to reveal further aspects of Tchaikovskys orchestral style, even though
some distinct characteristics are clearly exposed in this early work. Warrack directs most of
his attention towards Mendelssohns possible influence on the symphony. From a textural
point of view this assumption is highly plausible, and this document more than suggests that
Tchaikovsky manages to take Mendelssohn's elegant scoring a step further.
An appropriate wording is found in Groves introductory characteristic of Ts complete
symphonic output, mentioning one possible explanation of the somewhat troublesome birth of
the three first:
89
Tchaikovsky, Modest: Tchaikovskys Life, Vol. I (Moscow 1900-1902), p.248

Which version from the 1860s should be called the original is not too obvious, since what is today called the
original does not contain the actual middle movements that the audience at the world premiere attended in St.
Petersburg Feb. 1867, but which is a version partly consisting of elements forced upon Tchaikovsky by Zaremba
and A. Rubinstein, Tchaikovskys former teachers in composition & theory at the St. Petersburg Conservatory.
The version we today define as the original is probably in accordance with the version before the
Zaremba/Rubinstein-revision, premiered quite successfully in Moscow in February 1868. The revision made in
1874 is referred to as the final version in this document.
91
Tchaikovsky, Modest: Tchaikovskys Life, Vol. I (Moscow 1900-1902), p.263
92
Wilson Strutte: Tchaikovsky (Midas Books, Kent, 1979, ISBN 0 85936 113 6)
93
Anthony Holden: Tchaikovsky (Bantam Press/Transworld Pub.Ltd.1995)
90
94
John Warrack: Tchaikovsky (Hamish Hamilton Ltd., London 1973) p.49
44
Tchaikovsky's symphonies of any period are opulent, technically demanding essays in the
relationship of language to form. Rich in musical substance; they also respond to Western
expectations of integrated structure and coherence. These qualities mark their generic
identity, as Tchaikovsky displays the rapprochement of Russian individuality with this
proudest of Western genres. Aligning inspiration with genre explains the unusual features of
the first three symphonies, his seeking critique from his former teachers, and the ease with
which they discerned a tension between his music and their expectations of genre.95
David Browns large scale biography in four volumes is, obviously, the only one giving a
detailed description of the symphony, and we might therefore occasionally return to some of
his views when dealing with the respective movements. It is the largest biography in English
language on Tchaikovsky until this day, and dealing with this first movement he proclaims
that
Neither the title, Winter Daydreams, given to the whole symphony, nor the specific
headings above the first two movements offer much insight into what follows. () Certainly
the listener who doesn't know that the first movement is `Daydreams of a winter journey' and
the second `Land of gloom, land of mists', is unlikely to be handicapped by his ignorance.96
In connection with this statement he bluntly puts forward the following bold assertion, an
announcement which reveals a rather daring premise set for a large-scale biography:
Tchaikovsky was just about incapable of producing a work which did not incorporate
something of his own experience
Exactly how Brown arrived at this conclusion is yet unknown, which is most unfortunate,
taking into account Tchaikovskys rather exceptionally wide-ranging production.
By and large, A. Peter Brown is rather positive as concerns the work as such as well as its
programmatic allusions, and, like Warrack, suggests Mendelssohn as a possible inspirational
source.97 Martin Cooper, on the other hand, underlines the attitudes of the Abraham tradition:
In the First Symphony his handling of sonata form in the first movement is rather weak and thin, but
not positively irregular. He had not yet the skill or the individuality to break away from the academic
forms and to create anything really original in its place.98
95
Roland John Wiley. "Tchaikovsky, Pyotr Ilyich." Grove Music Online. Oxford Music Online, 2009-12
David Brown: Tchaikovsky. The Early Years, 1840-1874. (W. W. Norton & Co. Inc. 1978) p.102
97
A. Peter Brown: The Symphonic Repertoire Volume III Part B (Indiana University Press, Bloomington 2008)
pp.333-35
98
Martin Cooper (ed. G. Abraham): Tchaikovsky, A Symposium (Lindsay Drummond Ltd., London, 1945) p.30
96
45
Cooper does not support his allegation with analysis, descriptive examples or other
manifestation. Depending on how the wind blows, Tchaikovsky might in one context be
accused of being too academic, in another too little academic and/or too emotional.
Richard Taruskin, like Maes, refers in his essay Tchaikovsky as symphonist to the fact that
- most correctly - the metric 3 x 2/4-grouping is a distinct Kamarinskaya feature99. One may
keep in mind the question whether Glinkas work may also have had other effects on
Tchaikovskys First Symphony, above all texturally.
Taruskin holds that the opening movement is the most orthodox sonata-movement
Tchaikovsky ever wrote.100From a textural viewpoint, though, the movement is not
necessarily an unoriginal piece of music.
2.1.1.1 Symphony No. 1, Movement I: Orchestral backdrop: Textural Counterpoint;

Architectonic coherence via orchestration; Textural/Orchestral Factor
Within the field of orchestration one may expect to find variation as regards textural layercomplexity, each layer conveying varying degree of focus or attention. In the opening
movement of his First Symphony Tchaikovsky prepares the ground for his orchestral
approach, which not only gives the movement character, but also adds to its unity. Even
though Tchaikovsky's usage of textural counterpoint is not the core issue of this document, it
is, by way of introduction, demonstrated in brief so as to give a fuller picture of his
orchestration. It is used with consequence and inventory, fully in accordance with - and
complementary to - the composer's remaining dialectical procedures. During the introductory
part of the first theme Tchaikovsky displays his textural point of departure (Ex.1 I 1). The
accompanying and inconspicuous pianissimo tremolandos, setting the Allegro tranquillo
atmosphere, are not poly-linear in a melodic/motivic sense: Initially made up of sixteenthnotes, mostly moving in melodic thirds or seconds, they are just one manifestation of
complementing ideas one may observe recur, even develop through the movement. Initially
this technique is introduced in the first & second violins in the middle register (mm.1-17).
Some passages may very well take their origin from Mendelssohns Fourth Symphony, but
the departure from Mendelssohns bright, major-keyed Italy to Tchaikovskys Russian Winter
in the minor is rather swift, and within short Tchaikovsky leaves his very personal orchestral
imprints in the score. A connection between The Winter Daydream opening and the
99
100
Taruskin, Richard; On Russian Music (University of California Press, 2008), p.127

Ibid. p.126
46
introductory atmosphere of Sibelius somewhat later Violin Concerto is not unlikely either,
both are displaying the respective tranquil themes above soft, static tremolo strings.
Tchaikovsky makes use of several varied horizontal scoring techniques during this first
movement, and already in his First Symphony he is very conscious of the formally unifying
possibilities adhered to clearly defined orchestrational approaches. In the first movement this
phenomenon is materialized via a static ingredient, varying, for example, from
ff
tutti
displayed over a wide register, to, as is the case here, pp within a highly limited ambitus. This
static, anonym, yet well considered ingredient is complemented with one of the highly
profiled, undulating themes:
Ex.1 I 1 Textural factor
In these opening measures we observe a striking sense of economy. The score is stripped for
anything superfluous. The highly original melody - the first statement starting and ending
with an interval which will recur frequently in the score; the ascending fourth, keeps
unfolding in the flute and bassoon in optimal (for this type of instrumentation) double octave,
with naked violin-tremolando in the middle register.101 During mm.17-18 the violins move up
one octave, affirming the already established procedure until m.58. This feature is in line with
other orchestration strategies in the movement as concerns secondary material; they are
mainly of horizontal, static nature as opposed to the relatively curving themes (except from
the slightly more linearly profiled secondary thematic material of the first area). These
101
The woodwinds never touch the violin register in this introduction. Usage of segregated registers for
complementing layers represents a scoring principle extremely characteristic of Tchaikovsky, although he also
uses other methods for the same purpose. Transparent orchestration, though, comes not necessarily completely
naturally with symphonists of the romantic period.
47
textural boundaries which Tchaikovsky inflicts upon himself contribute to the movements
focused orchestration. On the one hand one might claim that these procedures are, if not
commonplace, traditional, some with a Mendelsohnian touch. On the other hand they
correspond well with later Tchaikovsky in the way that the approaches are used consistently
throughout the movement. Example 1 I 2 renders a rather traditional thematic
complementation where the flutes complement the violas. Thus there are three substantial
(recurring) layers in this excerpt: two thematic and one textural/orchestrational. The
procedure appears to be straight forward and self-evident, yet it is carried out with
consequence during extensive parts of the first movement. Also note the elegant form of the
layer, very characteristic of the composer, even of his thematic layers: in the beginning it is
constructed as a relatively stable line at its top register, followed by a stepwise descent.
This type of texture is not exceedingly used by Tchaikovsky in lyrical contexts. It is therefore
worthy of notice that it brings textural unity to this particular work; one encounters similar
textural solutions both in the second movement of this symphony and in the lyrical Trio-part
of the third movement.
Ex.1 I 2 Textural counterpoint (+ thematic complementation)
Already at this stage we may in addition pay attention to the rather anonym tetrachords in the
flutes at mm.31-5; this inconspicuous cell interacts in permuted forms in differently
48
constructed poly-linear textures later and participates in the unifying process of the outer
movements in the grand fugato of the finale.
From m.68 the violins take over the thematic material, elegantly handing over the static
tremolando to the flutes & clarinets at m.67, implicating a shifting of relative focus, tone
colour, register and key (Ex.1 I 3). (The divisi violins, playing arco & pizzicato in unison,
demonstrate an effect which Tchaikovsky reuses in this symphony, but one he shall utilize to
just a limited extent in his later symphonic production.)
Ex.1 I 3 Textural factor / textural counterpoint
The constantly flowing effect produced by the technique briefly rendered above has also its
counterpart in the harmonies produced in the eighth-note triplets of the woodwinds in the
recapitulation between mm.430-52 (Ex.1 I 5). These static wind formulas are hybridizations
between the tremolandos and earlier brass signals, the latter carried out quite persistently
particularly in the development. Here the static, textural factor is often made up by triplets, as
contrast to the duplets of the motivic elements, thus having an impact upon the retransition
(Ex.1 I 4, next page) and recapitulation (Ex.1 I 5).
49
The rushing, static triplets displayed in Ex.5 are let loose after having been built up during the
transition as an increasingly smouldering tension in the French horns from m. 401, and the
effect produced by the accompanying triplets of the rescored recapitulation may remind one
of the opening of Mendelssohn's Fourth Symphony:
The triplets were introduced in the violins and violas in form of melodic octaves already as an
accompaniment for the winds (at the start of the closing theme, m.220-5, Ex.1 I 6) and this
specific textural feature is further cultivated in the development. This type of triplets, in
various melodic octave combinations, gradually establishes itself as a constructional textural
element in the strings. But more important; it may be traced back to the opening violin
tremolandos. The static designs of the texturally contrapuntal layers are significantly
contributing to the tranquillity, or at least stabilizing factor, promised by Tchaikovskys
introductory ambience, despite the fortissimo passages of the first movement.
50
From m.226 the triplets transform into duplets, searching for a way back to the original
opening motive. The bass-line is built upon a Theme 2 cell, originating from m.163.
Ex.1 I 6 Textural factor (Closing Theme & semi-thematic counterpoint)
The string-figurations in the transition from mm. 226 are prolongations and transformations of
the above accompanying string-triplets. They start as a stepwise minor second, thus carrying
characteristics of the first three notes from the opening motive (Ex.1 I 10), in permuted
retrograde / inverted forms.
Later these octaves recur in the violins (Ex.1 I 7, mm.271-312) together with a permutation of
the first motive in the lower strings (mm.271-3), thereafter further developed by the
woodwinds from m.293: The violin triplets are interwoven with stepwise triplets in the
woodwinds the latter standing as melodically diminished echoes of the closing theme. These
octaves are definitely used as an organic orchestral variable during the movement, depending
on the actual dynamic and textural climate. The woodwind triplets from m.271might be
interpreted as hybrids of the preceding violin triplet and the abrupt three-note quotation from
the closing theme:
51
Ex.1 I 7 Textural factor and thematic counterpoint
Tchaikovsky thus makes use of these string triplets in melodic octaves with discipline
throughout the movement; eighth-note triplets in the upper strings are in fact used strictly only
in a rather static manner (mm.288-312 and 576-81) either in unison or octaves; the harmonic
saturation (relatively speaking) in the first violins at m.276 being the exception from the rule.
Separation of different ideas is further enhanced by the fact that the triplets are used for the
most part simultaneously with duplet material (mm.293-312, 340-75), which, as an isolated
phenomenon, is more of a common rhythmic device of the romantic period. The triplets are
further reinforced in the woodwinds from m.296, finally creating an alternative
accompaniment for the main theme in the recapitulation (m.430, Ex.1 I 5).
The ascending fourth, as demonstrated above in the violas at mm.267-71 and bassoon at
m.276, is identical with the two opening notes of the opening theme. This is another
demonstration of Tchaikovskys striving for economy and discipline, here creating a striking,
suspenseful, rocking ostinato from m.250 in the lower strings (see. Ex.1 I 7). In brief, the first
two, three and four notes respectively of the opening 1A1-theme recur in differentiated
52
constructions throughout the first movement102, as is also the case with 1A2, although to a
minor extent.
The recurrence of the main theme sets in after an ingeniously crafted retransition leading on to
it, built on the initial three notes (mm.395-430). The already augmented opening interval
keeps expanding to 5th and augmented 6th, until the rush of quaver triplets the
transforming, organic, textural factor is set loose, preparing the ground for the opening
theme (see also Ex.1 I 5). The motive, in its original or close to original statement, serves as
building material for the equally noble transition (m.676-93) leading towards the fainted, outdying version of the theme, forming a short, sophisticated and concentrated coda (m.745).
The above mentioned melodic octaves are kept strictly within the string section. Exx.1 I 4 & 5
demonstrate a static use of single-tone (unison) triplets in the winds. This is of course far from
being a sensation. But with signals like those of Ex. 8, Tchaikovsky does never yield to vary
or let go of their single-tone/single chord construction. They recur in a variety of haunting,
fanfare-like wind shapes, expressed mainly through the brass section, sometimes supported by
the woodwinds:
Ex.1 I 8 Textural counterpoint
An adjacent approach is found in combination with a transfiguration of 1A material and a

cross-metric chromatic bass near the orchestral climax of the development section (Ex.1 I 9,
mm.340-82; the upper woodwinds are omitted). The bassline disturbs the movements overall
3+3-measure construction with a 2+2-measure rhythm. The bass also represents a harmonic
challenge vis--vis the otherwise relatively stable b-minor atmosphere, the latter being
ensured above all by the brass signals:
102
One might even argue that there is a one-note reference from the closing theme, for example in mm.277-8; a
notion which is confirmed in m.279, where the previously singled-out note appears on the same beat and pitch.
The musical sentence is thereafter rounded off by singling out and repeating this note.
53
Ex.1 I 9 Textural and thematic counterpoint
The orchestral procedures above result in episodes we might have described as poly-linear;
they occur (respectively) simultaneously with other substantial material in more than one
local setting. Even though they are not quite as interesting as thematically contrapuntal
procedures, they contribute in creating an extremely integrated, interwoven and focused
orchestral output. In this movement Tchaikovsky demonstrates his capacity of creating soft
yet clear orchestral refinement and subtle nuance, as well as extremely well-calculated
orchestral outbursts originating, defined by a recurring textural factor.
There are some similarities with the (melodically) reappearing single-note fanfare statements
in Tchaikovskys movement compared to the Beethovenian fate motive in Brahmss First
Symphony, but in the case of the latter, Brahms permits his motive to appear in various
instrumental guises, where it is given a primary focus, usually without implementing any
additional, complementing or challenging thematic layer, while Tchaikovsky keeps his signals
strictly within the realms of the winds, mostly as secondary or tertiary material
counterpointing the themes.
Summary: The composer makes use of easily detectable, reappearing orchestration procedures
in this movement, although without falling into exaggeration. These approaches should not be
confused with textures possessing less constructive importance, appearing only once or twice,
having no, or vague, coordinates throughout the movement, and thus having no long-term
developmental relevance.
During the succeeding chapter on thematic counterpoint in this movement, cross-references
may be made to some of the previous examples. Developmental procedures other than
thematic counterpoint are sometimes referred to when appearing in a suitable context.
54
2.1.1.2 Thematic counterpoint

Taking a brief overview of the thematic material, we find that the Main Area consists of two
thematic elements, 1A (Exx.1 I 1, 2, 3, 10) and 1B (Exx.1 I 2, 8, 11). 1A is sometimes being
referred to as the "main theme", although only the opening phrase is mainly used
developmentally, above all only the first four, three or first two notes.
Ex.1 I 10: 1A material
The rounding off of this first statement ends in a rather unusual manner (m.16), just the way it
started, with an ascending perfect fourth.
The 1A2-phrase (see Ex.2) opens with an ascending tetrachord, 1A2a, and the importance of
this cell is stressed as the composer singles it out in the flutes at m.31 ff (see Ex.1 I 2).
The secondary material of the main Area is a chromatically oriented gestalt. Although the 1A
and 1B materials might appear as contrasted, they share some rhythmic characteristic:
Ex. 1 I 11: 1B material
The variants of this material are for the most part easily recognizable and determinable,
despite the similarities mentioned above. Disclosing motivic material is essential in order to
reveal, or determine, thematic counterpoint: For example, in the climax of the development
section the first interval of 1A1a is permuted, forming a three-note synchronic gestalt (m.340:
f#-g-f#, m.343: d-c#-d). The continuous transformation of this permuted cell may be traced
until m.375; thereafter it is augmented from m.386 and still more so during the retransition
until the recurrence of the main theme, now in its full statement at m.432. The three-note
gestalt then returns to its initial form (now in e-minor) from m.676, culminating in a
descending line in the strings until m.693, thereafter building up again towards the recurrence
of its original g-minor opening in the coda.
55
The first typical example containing thematically based counterpoint occurs in mm. 90-101.
Derivations of both capital motives of the main theme participate in an episode where 1B
escalates, until a firm 1B statement dominates the texture at m.106. By keeping each idea
within individual registers, the composer has complete acoustic balance between them, given
the notated dynamics are respected, thereby ensuring a most desired separation of timbre a
characteristic valid for the majority of Tchaikovskys contoured, transparent orchestration of
thematic counterpoints. This timbral segregation thoroughly enhances the experience of multifocus in Tchaikovskys score. Even the sustained, octavated pedal in the horns is kept
physically undistorted as long as possible (mm. 91-3), establishing a discreet yet important
stabilizing role in this otherwise harmonically restless landscape:
Ex.1 I 12: Thematic counterpoint
Regardless of the complexity of Tchaikovsky's textures, the overall contrapuntal control is

irreproachable down to the smallest detail. In the above example we observe that the Bmotive (in the strings) operates simultaneously with 1A in the woodwinds from m. 91. The
first four notes of the A- motive occur both in the original form (mm.91-92,1), slightly
permuted, then immediately linked to its inversion (mm.92-93). Another Tchaikovskyspeciality reveals itself in the above example: frequent shift of timbre in the woodwinds
(mm.91-3) within one textural field, making the already intriguing symphonic moment still
more challenging and rewarding.
From m.101 1B material accelerates to a new dialectic discourse between the strings and the
winds (mm.106-17; see. Ex.1 I 8), culminating and resolving in a bold, re-harmonized
restatement of the opening phrase over a descending bass line (mm.117-37). From the
statement of the subsidiary theme and onward there might be closer thematic connections to
56
such lines than here, in such cases mostly indicating thematically oriented counterpoints. But
in this example the falling line represents a local type of counterpoint.
The statement of the Subsidiary Theme (Ex.1 I 13) might also give the impression of being
accompanied by countermelodies or other types of local counterpoints (Ex.1 I 14).
Ex.1 I 13 Subsidiary Theme
Yet on closer examination the counterpoints tend to be developed from the theme, and are
thus of a more substantial kind. The 2B-counterpoint from m.149 (Ex.1 I 14), adopted from
the first statement at m.138ff, renders a slight 1Aa impression, yet above all the theme's
descending pitches 3-6 ("Y") are used contrapuntally from m.156: Augmented and inverted
forms of this tetrachord counterpoint the (close to) original cell, added by a fourth substantial
layer; an augmented chromatic bass in the transitory passage from m.159. The 'x' cell of 2B
fulfils this elegant contrapuntal passage. This cell is also absorbed in the restatement of 2A.
Ex.1 I 14 (Theme-continuation) Thematic and semi-thematic counterpoints
57
The Second area continues developing by means of thematically based imitatively oriented
counterpoint (Ex.1 I 15). The countermovement by which the counterpointing layers move are
particularly worthy of notice: Despite the dense texture, unavoidable dissonances resulting
from intersection of two melodic layers, mostly moving by parallel fourths, are resolved in the
most convincing and exemplary manner above pedals on c# and a.
Ex.1 I 15 Subsidiary Theme, continued: Thematic counterpoints
In this section the lines in the violins, woodwinds and lower strings (except 2nd bassoon &
double bass) thus consist of three measures from the theme plus three measures from the
themes semi-thematic continuation. The Subsidiary Theme then dies out, first above a quite
challenging dominant seventh103, finally left only with traces from the cross-directional lines
in the upper and lower strings (mm.181-8) respectively:
103
One could possibly claim that some of the long notes in this movement, like this pedal-oriented seventh in the
bass, to some extent can be associated with the overall static textural factor. For operational reasons we choose
to ask for at least some sort of additional rhythmic ingredient in order to attract sufficient textural attention in
this movement.
58
Ex.1 I 16: Subsidiary area (closing); semi-thematic inverted echoes (from m.180)
The organic development from the above section to the next (Ex.1 I 17, m.190) is as elegant
as it is simple and effective; the descending, repeated tetrachord in the violins and the
respective ascending version in the lower strings are appearing in diminutions of the thematic
vestiges in advance of the GP (i.e. the original thematic note values), accompanied by static
wind signals. In respect of orchestration, the fact that the strings never cross the vertical
territory of the signals in the winds is also worthy of mention, ensuring acoustic transparency.
Ex.1 I 17 Textural factor & Semi-thematic counterpoint
The transformed material in the strings continues to move upward, while the upper
woodwinds keep affirming the static signal until the closing theme at m.220.
59
The development of this material constitutes a brilliantly shaped seamless transition towards
the concluding theme. The lyrical subsidiary theme has been transformed to a heroic closing
theme (m.220, see Exx.1 I 16 & 18).
Having been presented to the thematic material, the themes seem to possess some
constructional similarities; they start with upward leaps, succeeded by one stepwise fall, then
succeeded by a falling melodic third.
Ex.1 I 18 Thematic connection
Though the three themes derive from the same source, each of them possesses individual
expressive characteristics.
The development section starts with an immediate culmination, permutation and
fragmentation of the closing theme. The latter is presented above the ascending fourth in the
lower strings; an interval all the three themes have in common. This important and
characteristic cell thus gives a touch of discreet, subtle thematic counterpoint:
Ex.1 I 19 Hint of thematic counterpoint
These two slurred notes in the lower strings are found as a steady rocking, isolated
accompaniment under the dissimilation of the closing theme in the horns, repeated in the
violas and clarinets respectively in the relative minor (m.261-9), transposed and rescored at
m.276 (see Ex.1 I 7).
The rather anonym, ascending tetrachords displayed in the flutes at mm. 31-2 and 34-5 appear
as being totally inconspicuous serving as a complementation to the theme against the 1A2.
Yet this thematic complement is developed further after the exposition and, above all, the
60
tetrachord as such gains in importance in the finale, counterpointing the material of that
movement as well as participating in the unification process between the outer movements.
Ex.1 I 20 Tetrachord cell of Theme 1 - used in the outer movements
This thematic tetrachord can be observed in augmented form, first from m.296 (Ex.1 I 21),
engaging in three successive, quite similar poly-linear textures in combination with a
substantially permuted element from the core of the opening theme; Element 1: the permuted
opening motive, played by the woodwinds (mm. 293-5), immediately picked up by the first
violins (m.295); Element 2: a permutation of the Closing Theme presented in the lower strings
(mm. 294-8); Element 3: the ascending tetrachord from m m.296-8, which had been
complementing/answering the theme already in the exposition (ref. also Ex.1 I 20). In other
words; this thematic construction is further developed in 1 I 21, supplied with two additional
substantial layers. An additional layer within this masterfully developed texture is built upon
the texturally recurring fluctuant triplets (see also Ex.1 I 6&7) flying up and down in the
second violins and violas. Notice also how this layer effects the development of the main
theme (Vn.I), as it absorbs the legato - staccato phrasing, contrasting it in inverted form.
Ex.1 I 21 Thematic counterpoint
61
The closing theme strengthens its position further as it moves closer to the modulatory section
between mm.312-26, where the composer uses four-part, sectional, imitative counterpoint:
Ex.1 I 22 Thematic counterpoint (woodwinds and horns are omitted)
A variation of the previous section takes over at m.328, this time based on a version of the
closing theme which corresponds closer to its original. Worthy of note is the rather
asymmetrical crafting of the second voice from m.335, partly breaking away from the
presumed strict pattern vis--vis the upper voice:
This third variant of the closing theme (violins mm.329-30) bears strong similarity with the
opening of the main theme of the Finale. In the latter, the first three notes are an inversion of
the closing theme variation from the first movement, but the appearance in general is
strikingly similar: a triad plus a falling second with an inserted pause:
62
Ex.1 I 24 Finale, m.66; thematic correlate
The orchestral climax and closing of the development at mm.562-92 is succeeded by a threemeasure ostinato based on 1B material (mm.592-4). When established, it serves as a ground
beneath the permuted Subsidiary Theme, the latter now being exposed in the upper strings in
a totally new harmonic and of course poly-linear environment. In addition to the puzzling
simultaneity of the two melodic factors, the harmonic ambiguity at the beginning of this coda
may seem daring for its time:
Semi-ambiguous harmonies occur in some of the forthcoming poly-linear constellations, as

when 1B continues running into reminiscences of former episodes, exemplified by the
melodic ascending/descending fifth (Ex.1 I 27) which forcefully established itself during mm.
389-400 (Ex.1 I 26), at that point as a consequence of an orchestral explosion of the main
theme, reminiscent by its three opening notes.
The continuous transformation of the three-note cell during the development is demonstrated
in Ex.1 I 26.
Ex.1 I 26: Transformation of 1A1a
63
This cell recurs in a further transformed variant in the woodwinds in a new poly-linear
construction between mm.619-21, in fashion of a statement in the horns at m.622:
The bass-ostinato then moves into an imitative constellation. This excerpt is the start of a long
escalating retransition towards the recurrence of the main theme at m. 670, after a short
dwelling on its sub-motive 1Ab at mm. 658-63. The way in which Tchaikovsky starts
building up this brief fugato passage is also worth mentioning: From m. 607 the lower strings
had been establishing the ostinato within the frame of the initial three-measure sub-division.
But the violas (m.627), violin II (m.628) and violin I (m.630) enter in rather non-predictable
ways above the chromatically modulating bass.
From m.676 the culmination of the climax starts with a permuted sub-motive of the opening
motive in the strings, which has just been played in a varied form during the preceding
measures; the first three notes104, bursting through the majestic, yet restrained singletone/single chord static fanfare-motive.
The movement then ends the way it started (m.745 ff.); the 2nd motive from the Main Theme
is fragmented even more, resolving into thin air, and thus most elegantly creating a natural
transition towards the next movement: Land of Desolation, Land of Mists.
104
During the movement various permutations of these 3 notes have occurred the combination of one leap and
stepwise motion presented as original, invention, retrograde, retrograde inversion and their derivatives.
64
There might be several reasons for assigning thematic credit to the chromatically dominated
bassline at mm. 117. It might be read as a stylization of 1B or prolongations of the transitory
chromatic descents at m.80 before the return of 1A. This suggests that this texture contains
thematic counterpoint, but since descending and ascending bass lines are rather standard
solutions, they most often are labelled as 'semi-thematic' when there is a thematic association
to it. Throughout this document, though, the reader will find a wealth of examples by which
the composer utilizes this type of counterpoint.
Ex.1 I 29 Semi-thematic counterpoint
In his review of this movement, which covers approx. seven pages, David Brown has written
about seven lines referring to Tchaikovskys contrapuntal achievements. This extreme
confinement may thus easily be rendered in its entirety:
Most of what follows ( in the development) is made up by combining or contrapuntally
working pieces of material extracted or derived from the exposition, and building these little
syntheses into blocks of up to six bars long which are then sequentially repeated. In the
middle, where contrapuntal imitation assumes control, it might look as though the movement
will fall into that contrived bustle, which does service in so much of the finale, but the pitfall
is swiftly avoided, and the lead back to the recapitulation is one of the most arresting moments
in the whole symphony. 105
"Contrived bustle" is a subjective assessment; 'complexity' is not. It is astonishing that

Brown has found no closer examination of the actual episodes worthwhile, taking into
account the abundance and the originality of the material. Yet equally remarkable is his
failure in recognizing substantial contrapuntal work to be a predominant feature with the
movement as such, a feature not just confined to the development section. Furthermore,
105
David Brown: Tchaikovsky. The Early Years, 1840-1874. (W. W. Norton & Co. Inc. 1978) pp.114-15.
65
his three first lines, in which he tries to describe Tchaikovskys contrapuntal work, is a
description very much in accordance with the procedure used by the earlier classical
masters and even correlates well to some episodes in the symphonies of Brahms.
Already in the composer's first symphonic movement there are at least three outstanding
qualities characterizing the polyphonic web: 1: there is a considerable amount of
simultaneous substantial thematic material. 2: The counterpoints, thematic as well as
textural, stand out as clearly contoured in the score in a well balanced, clear-cut orchestral
presentation, within which the composer makes use of few orchestral elements whose
main function might have been to serve as a textural safeguard. 3: The contrapuntal work
represents variety and inventiveness as a result of constant renewal of motive
combinations.
Even so; one might with some justification claim that the textural strategies may to some
extent resemble those of Mendelssohn, and that the counterpoints are not particularly
more numerous than those of the symphonies of Rimsky-Korsakov and Borodin. Yet the
sum of these factors makes even Tchaikovsky's first symphonic movement a highly
noteworthy textural experience.
2.1.2 Symphony No.1, movement II (Land of Desolation, Land of Mists)
In this slow movement subsections which may appear as being local-contrapuntally angled
are to some extent worked out and varied, even developed inside the borders of these
subsections. They might be regarded as borderline cases, though they formally must be
classified as textures partly constructed via local counterpoint106, presumed, naturally, that no
further thematic connections exist. The forthcoming texture represents a chamber-musical
example which contains three simultaneous melodic factors, presented in the obo, flute and
bassoon respectively (Ex.1 II 1). Even though the movement's introductory measures 107 are
significant from a textural point of view as regards color and there are signs of dialectic
focus even here we will move to the contrapuntally furnished melody at m.24. Attention
should also be paid to Tchaikovskys transparent instrumentation, obtained by avoiding
crossing the vertical territory of neighbouring voices. Whenever possible, Tchaikovsky also
106
Thematically based portions of such episodes might occur, and the composer hints at stylized counterpoints in
the introduction and coda.
107
A. Peter Brown discusses problems related to the form of this movement in The Symphonic Repertoire
Volume III Part B (Indiana University Press, Bloomington 2008) p.337
66
avoids crossing supporting voices, seen in the following example where the syncopated
violins operate within a very limited ambitus. The oboe-melody is supplied with a sharply
contoured local counterpoint in the flute. It is not only characterized by the stepwise thirtysecond-notes leading on to the weightier notes; the ascending and descending, curved contour
is equally characteristic. From m.27 the bassoon creeps in very discreetly in stepwise motion,
until it starts transforming into an angular, highly profiled melodic contour possessing
frequent major leaps, often combined with syncopations. Technically the stepwise descents
also characterize the theme. The syncopated and un-syncopated leaps most probably resonate
from the opening turn of the theme's second phrase, hinting at a thematic relevance. Thus the
three melodic voices have their own very distinct contour, and the sum of the two lower
voices preserve the relatively continuous eighth-note motion. The characteristic flute voice
always enters after a 32-note pause, the stepwise 32-notes representing just passing notes
sooner than the theme in diminutive inversion. The supplementary voices in the violins and
violas never cross lines/blend with the three melodic voices. As was also the case with the
transparent texture from the opening of the first movement, the chord material is placed
within the one-line octave, the bass register only occupied by the melodic bassoon. The
atmosphere is anything else than over-romantic or sentimental; a sensation ensured by the
contrapuntal, intertwining procession of the three woodwinds, rooted in a confined, plain
harmonization, suiting the noble theme, the latter evoking Russian folksong.
Ex.1 II 1Local and thematic counterpoints (viola part omitted)
67
(Ex.1 II 1Local and semi-thematic counterpoints, continued)
The origin of the occasional leaps in the oboe and bassoon of the above example can be traced
back to the melodic octaves in the flute in the brief transition after the introduction (m.21-2,
Ex.1 II 2). These melodic leaps strengthen the thematic connection between the theme and the
bassoon counterpoint, and might alternatively be read as a distinct thematic ingredient, to
some extent coloring if not dominating the bassoon part:108
Ex.1 II 2 Transition (second violins, violas and cellos omitted)
When one of the three simultaneous melodic elements falls out (e.g. the flute from m. 90), one
of the two remaining layers is imitated, as when the oboe and clarinet imitate the violins from
m.90. The continuous presence of the restless, bouncing bassoon-part assures a highly original
three part counterpoint. The importance of this counterpoint continues to grow, to the extent
of being a thematic counterpart almost on equal terms with the theme itself. But the peculiar
opening intervals are far from accidental: They correspond with the symphony's opening
theme:
108
Russian folksong elements, like the melodic octave and the descending fourth, are not discussed in this
document.
68
Ex.1 II 3 Local and thematic counterpoints
We will return to a short summary of characteristic features with the above example after a
discussion on a similarly built construction in the fourth movement.
A typical feature with Tchaikovskys orchestral style is represented in one of the reinstrumentations of the theme; the melody in the horns is supplied with a beautifully shaped,
optimally complementing counterpoint in the upper strings. This counterpoint might be
interpreted as semi-thematic on account of its obvious affiliation to linear portions of both
thematic materials. The cello & bass part represents a third notable layer: In addition to being
influenced by the thematic material, this layer also absorbs characteristics of the previous
pizzicato bass accompanying the first theme between mm.64-84. In retrospect this new
material-constellation draws an extended connection-line between the melodic materials and
the leaping bassoon counterpoint, serving as a continuation of the latter:
Ex.1 II 4 Thematic / Semi-thematic counterpoints
The 2nd flute doubles the upper violin voice throughout (non tremolo), the 1st flute doubles in 8va.
Tchaikovsky's flair for imitative possibilities associated with any theme possible should be
noted already in this work: The opening phrase of the original second theme is imitated
unchanged at m.54:
Ex.1 II 5 Thematic counterpoint (only thematic layers are rendered)
69
There are also extremely thinned out contrapuntal textures in this movement, like in the
measures right in advance of the reference to the work's opening theme (m.88): Both layers
are thematically rooted, the thematic close in the first violins is reminiscent of the first theme's
inversion, and the woodwind parts are stylizations of same:
Ex.1 II 6 Semi-thematic counterpoint
Once having been made aware of the I 1A reference (m.88), it might even be possible to
accept that the contour of the second theme of the second movement might be associated with
the first theme of the first. The tremolando figurations accompanying the first theme of the
second movement between m.64-84 represents even a textural affiliation with the first.
2.1.3 Symphony No.1, movement III: Contrary motion and timbral contrast
Each of the initial three movements starts with light, transparent textures. The third movement
is a brilliantly carved Scherzo, full of rhythmic invention, with a rhythmically intriguing,
short introduction. The upper woodwinds seem to transcend into ordinary hemiola:
3/8+3/8+2/8x3. But the bassoons, in chromatically oriented parallel thirds, commencing with
syncopations, muddle and challenge this preconception.109 Subsequently the four-part divisi
violins alone present the opening of the first section of this scherzo. This author is not
particularly fond of forcing imagery upon other listeners, but if one of several snowy allusions
should be suggested in the Winter Daydream Symphony, this might be one such occasion.
The Dance of the Snowflakes from The Nutcracker represents an adjacent moment where
Tchaikovsky blends triple meter, frequent use of hemiola, transparent orchestral textures and
extreme voice-leading into a white, whirling sensation.110 But the instrumentation is far more
confined in this scherzo, so is the harmonization and range of expression. The introductory
undulations in the woodwinds take root in the ensuing theme:
109
Josef Kraus comments some rhythmical aspects concerning the First Symphony and other works in his
chapter Analysis and Influence: A Comparison of Rhythmic Structures in the Instrumental Music of Schumann
and Tchaikovsky, from Tchaikovsky and his contemporaries A Centennial Symposium (Greenwood Press,
Westport, 1999) p.121, 317, 318. Kraus sees Tchaikovskys rhythmic invention as a continuation and
transcendence of Schumanns achievements.
110
Since Tchaikovsky initially wrote this scherzo for his first Piano Sonata, an eventual external or
programmatic source of inspiration remains unknown.
70
Ex.1 III 1 Textural/local counterpoint (see 1.3.9) & timbral contrast
But instead of alluding to a ballet scene, this movement might alternatively be compared to a
painters fascination with subtle variations of a dance routine: It is a movement of
considerable discipline also when it comes to handling contrasting textural elements. This
contrast is achieved by juxtaposing timbres, register and, not rarely, physical direction. The
movement displays an artist at work who excels in combining strict elements with a constant
renewed angling of these elements. The orchestral architecture of the A-part of the
movements ternary form is made with an elegant, sophisticated touch: There is a constant
two-sided aspect to the melodic material, from a rhythmical as well as a linear, melodic
viewpoint.
Counter-directional layers come to the fore already after the theme's opening eight measures,
measures which shall later dictate a constant call for thematic renewal. From m.13
thematically based descending woodwinds encounter an ascending pizzicato block (Ex.1 II 2).
A slight difference as concerns rhythmical accentuations between the two groups underlines
their respective contrapuntal impact. The construction executed at mm. 13-16 is immediately
succeeded by a thinned-out, contrasting texture. By omitting the violas in measure 19, the
composer gives the bassoons sufficient acoustic freedom between the remaining string
instruments. Countermovement is the common denominator for the scherzo section. This
strategy widens the definition of 'textural counterpoint' in this specific movement, thus not
restricting the term to the textural linear factor as such. Measures 13-14 may serve as
exemplification of the strategy, involving two instrument sections in countermovement, while
71
the continuation consists of the thematic element versus the textural linear factor in the cellos
and basses:
Ex.1 III 2 Textural/local counterpoint / timbral contrast
During the composers search for new rhythmical subtlety between the two orchestral groups,
there has gradually been formed an image of a 2+2+4 measure pattern, making a contrast
not only between the orchestral groups but between the first four measures and the next.
When dealing with contrasting ideas like those of mm. 25-28 (Ex.1 III 3), Tchaikovsky would
normally let them operate within separate registers. But because of their extremely contrasting
timbral, constructional and directional properties, the composer allows their lines crossing
each other. The pedal in the horns, though (harmonically representing the dominant root/tonic
fifth), is unbroken, as is often the case in similar situations in Tchaikovsky's scores. The
strategy involving counterbalancing the woodwinds against the strings is maintained.
Simultaneously, though appearing to be rather insignificant at mm. 21-24 and 29-32, the
pizzicato strings add discreet rhythmical contrast. Some might possibly wish to read the
stylized counterpoints as thematic, derived from the thematic variation/continuation from
m.25 ff.
Ex.1 III 3 Textural / local counterpoint & timbral contrast
(turn to the next page)
72
These modulatory yet unrestrained textures proceed from c minor to g# minor at m.37 (Ex.1
III 4). Here the layers form a new, ultra-thin texture, implying simultaneously a renewal of the
hemiola approach. The timbral mixture consisting of arco and pizzicato in unison, which also
could be observed in the first movement, is a delicacy which Tchaikovsky should use to a
lesser extent in later works, presumably finding it somewhat inefficient. But not more so than
when revising the work, he decided to keep this solution, - for all we know he may have done
this in order to depict some frosty crispness with these passages.
In addition to the recurring principle involving contrary motion it could at this stage even
make sense to define the contrasting timbres in this movement as a textural counterpoint,
particularly in relation to the scherzo parts, and even to some extent with regard to the trio.
Ex.1 III 4 m.33-6: Textural/local counterpoint & timbral (and from 37ff) rhythmic contrast
73
From m.13 Tchaikovsky has followed something approximating a rhythmic 2+2+4

combination, but feels the time ripe to break down this formula. The last measure of the m.4548 phrase (Ex.1 II 5) also serves as the first measure in the subsequent phrase toward the
recurrence of the scherzo theme. The importance of the textural counterpoint is slightly
reduced, as focus in respect of physical direction becomes the more emphasized.
Ex.1 III 5 Metric flexibility, textural/local counterpoint & timbral contrast
Juxtaposition in respect of timbral focus continues, together with renewed subtle rhythmical
contrast (58ff); the hemiolas create an accelerating stretto-effect towards the recurrence of the
scherzo's opening measures at m.62, now cautiously rescored with new rhythmic
accentuations added in the woodwinds.
Ex.1 III 6 Timbral and rhythmical dialectics
The composer continues to explore new possible rhythmical nuances in this movement (note,
for example, the bass off-beat, see Ex.1 II 7), while every formal contrapuntal aspect is
handled with utmost care. It might be noted that the horn-line is part of a thematic statement
74
in slow motion (reminiscent of the theme's seven opening notes). The sectional focus between
the orchestral groups is retained, executed with elegance, ease and clarity.
Ex.1 III 7 Thematic counterpoint/Timbral/rhythmical contrast/Local counterpoint (from m.86)
From the movements Trio the below hemiola episode should definitely be rendered, which
bears some resemblance to the already noted Waltz of the Snowflakes from one of the
composers latest works; The Nutcracker. The ballet music is the more dramatic of the two,
harmonically as well as melodically, with the last of the four slurred semiquavers in the upper
strings are absent in the whirling waltz of the snowflakes. Yet we observe that the music of its
symphonic counterpart is carried out with elegance at the expense of drama, preserving
contrary motion between the melody in the woodwinds and the utterly well-organized
contrapuntal string-block.
Ex.1 III 8 Rhythmical (and timbral) dialectics
75
The trio is richly supplied with local counterpoints, particularly from m.174, with hints of
semi-thematic references. The latter is also noticeable at the restatement of the trio. In a
transitory passage leading to the timbrally contrasting codetta the rhythm of the scherzo is
counterpointed against the lyrical trio theme in the timpani and strings respectively, thus
resulting in thematic counterpoint. This textural field is as original as it is facile from a
technical viewpoint; the timpani vary by starting their pedal phrases on c and g every second
phrase.
Ex.1 III 9 Thematic counterpoints
Textural two-sidedness is to some degree also found with other composers of the Romantic
era, but seldom to the same degree. This is a basic feature with Tchaikovsky's general
compositional style, manifesting itself in various ways during his entire career. In this scherzo
the multi-sidedness as regards textural and rhythmic subtlety is carried out with consequence
and clarity. For a romantic piece the textural transparency of this movement is sober sooner
than romantic. The actual scoring clarity shows affinity with the classical masters, but the
pervasive dialectics characterizing the score represents steps ahead: These textures often
depict contrary motion between orchestral groups and/or complementing rhythmic or melodic
ideas between contrasting textural fields. The interplay between the woodwind- and the
string-sections is at least equally important as are the remaining dialectic approaches of this
movement.
76

2.1.4.1 Semi-thematic counterpoint
In the Finale solutions representing complementary linear construction are apparent to the
extent of partly constituting a notable complementary principle. We get a notion of this
approach already with the introductory Andante lugubre (Ex.1 IV 1), where the bassoons hint
at the ensuing statement of the actual melody. Absence of strings emphasizes the pronounced
clarity in this highly elegant introduction, although smooth and refined linear part-writing is a
feature characteristic of Tchaikovsky. This principle has already been easily observed in the
preceding movements, but it will to a significant extent dominate the finale.
The reason for this might be found in the introductory theme, where six notes in the theme
move in falling stepwise motion: This principal thus has a thematic argument, but since
linearly formed counterpoints represent a rather common solution in a large number of works,
they are for the most part111 labelled 'semi-thematic' even when having thematic relevance.112
Both the designation Andante lugubre' and the fermata pauses indicate tension of some sort, a
tension gradually being resolved as summer and the folk song "The Garden Bloomed" gains
terrain later.
Ex.1 IV 1 Semi-thematic counterpoint
Before the actual introductory theme appears (a theme close of being a slow version of the
subsidiary theme, see Ex. 1 IV 2), the focus on the introductory cell continues at m.9 in the
upper woodwinds, counterpointed by a chromatically flavoured descending bass line in the
bassoons, for the most part producing parallel harmonic relationships. This straightforward
two-part semi-thematic counterpoint ensures a transparent and simple yet noble and elevated
atmosphere.
111
Added thematic characteristics will normally border to or justify a 'thematic' classification.

In the event of having vague thematic relevance, as was the case in the preceding movement, such lines are
labeled 'local' counterpoints.
112
77
Ex. 1 IV 2 Semi-thematic counterpoint
This procedure is repeated in contrasting tone-colour by the strings, prolonging the conjunct,
descending, partly chromatic bass; timbral contrast once again manifests itself as a striking
textural hallmark in Tchaikovsky.113 What increases the listeners attention towards this bassline is the irregular rhythm and possibly slightly unpredictable harmonic implications 114. Just
as we have had our attention focused on the bass and the melody, the bassoons creep in as a
third layer attracts attention: After a smooth, stepwise onset, they incorporate more and more
the type of odd leaps and turns which formed such characteristic bassoon-layers in similar
textural constructions in the second movement (see also Ex.1 II 3).
Although these voices are not in themselves exceptional, the continuous addition of new
conjunct lines in the remaining woodwinds from m.25 creates an extremely elegant score,
with up to four separate individual layers at mm.25-26 and 29-30. Nevertheless the music
flows effortlessly, restrained and exalted, due to the composer's customary elegant partwriting. Except for the viola pedal, each voice has a melodic role in this semi-thematically
rich texture.
Ex. 1 IV 3 Semi-thematic counterpoints
113
Some may find remote relationship between this theme and the subsidiary theme of the 1.st movement.
The statement is characterized by a persistent interchange of minor and major dominants and sub-dominants.
In this writer's view, as a rule too much uncritical emphasis has been placed on a presumably planned harmonic
structure within a given work: During the reading of this document the reader will find that Tchaikovsky excels
in counterpointing lines to almost any theme possible. Thus such lines become architectural goals in themselves,
being at least equally important as the chords as such. Consequently the produced harmonic combinations come
as the result of these lines, not necessarily the other way round, although, of course, harmonic functions as such
are always inescapably valid.
114
78
The excerpt from m.25 (Ex.1 IV 4) bears strong textural resemblance with an excerpt from the
second movement (see Ex.1 II 1), and consists of four separate melodic elements; - the violin
theme, - the melodic, stepwise bass, - the melodic bassoons with their characteristic
occasional abrupt leaps, and the additional descant counterpoints in the upper woodwinds
(including the anonym tetrachord cell from the first movement).115 Not only are the
contrapuntal combinations strikingly familiar, even the construction of the actual contrapuntal
layers correlate to a high degree. Yet even though the themes themselves stand out as very
individual, a closer look reveals some similar melodic elements.
Ex.1 IV 4 Semi-thematic counterpoints
Until m.31 the upper woodwinds had attracted increased attention, to such a degree that
primary focus on this instrument section was to be expected. This happens at m.31, much due
to the octave leaps in the flutes and clarinets, on top of simultaneous motivic and motivically
inverted material. At m.33 three individual semi-thematic lines appear simultaneously:
Ex.1 IV 4 Semi-thematic counterpoint (the brass and strings are omitted)
115
Observe also the folkloristic melodic octave in the flutes, bassoons and first clarinet.
79
The introductory theme then culminates with a restatement of the introductory motive at
m.34, slightly re-orchestrated. The atmosphere is more withheld this time, with added fermata
pauses and timpani rolls, before the motive accelerates until m.47; Allegro moderato. In this
transition the composer makes use of complementing stepwise ascending lines building up
towards the dominant preparation in advance of the Main Theme. The woodwinds on the
whole double the strings, a procedure which in this example underscores the striking
ascending lines, at the expense of timbral contrast (Ex.1 IV 5):
Ex.1 IV 5 Semi-thematic counterpoints
But before the actual Allegro maestoso-theme unfolds, the dominant preparation continues by
a stylized version of elements from the introductory measures. The pervasive, stepwise
procedure thus proceeds, highly unifying the introductory textural fields. The characteristic
turn on the fifth and sixth scale degrees in the violin layer is a common feature with the main
and subsidiary themes of the outer movements, particularly the Finale.
Ex.1 IV 6 Semi-thematic counterpoints / thematic inversion
At m.180 a fugato on the subsidiary theme is transformed into a subtle cultivation of the
movements linear, semi-thematic orientation at m.188-89 (Ex.1 IV 7). In addition the violins
counterpoint the fugato by use of variations of the tetrachord and the theme's original
introductory cell from the main theme of the first movement:
80
Ex.1 IV 7 Thematic counterpoint transforming to semi-thematic c.p. (excerpt)
In advance of the above example a brief poly-linear construction (at m.157, Ex.1 IV 8)
concludes with the following rhythmically complementing semi-thematic lines:
Ex.1 IV 8 Semi-thematic counterpoint (thematic inversion)
At m.370 this linear, cross-directional textural tendency comes to the fore again in the
retransition in the strings (see Ex.1 IV 9), complemented by the horns, creating a passage
having much in common with a corresponding textural field in the first movements mm.40130. The syncopated descending chromatic line in the upper strings can be traced back to an
inverted preparation of the main theme (motives from the theme are shown in Ex.1 IV 10) and
to a counterpointing inversion earlier in the movement (see Ex.1 IV 12). These lines also
correspond with the lower strings from the same part of the theme (Ex.1 IV 10), and also the
introduction. In reality the whole episode is a dramatic reworking of the themes second
motive, including its inverted counterpoint, and thus might alternatively easily have deserved
being labelled as 'thematic counterpoint'. During the elaboration of the three linear layers,
bold dissonances appear and resolve frequently (Ex. 1 IV 9).
81
The texturally static fanfare-shaped signals and horizontal tremolandos of the first movement
find their counterparts to the counter-directional layers of the finale; they are textural
counterpoints, but the procedures of the finale are sometimes close of being thematic and are
at any rate semi-thematic. Together with high degree of thematic counterpoint, the final result
becomes the more imposing.
2.1.4.2 Thematic Counterpoint

In light of the contrapuntal work found in the first movement, one might expect to find a
significant amount of substantial counterpoint also in the finale, since this is also a sonata
form. Comparison of motivic elements from the opening movement and the main theme of the
finale has been made earlier (Ex.1 I 23-24), but the main theme of the finale is significantly
longer than its counterpart in the first movement. Together with the theme's characteristic
opening motive 1A, the ascending stepwise, syncopated line, 1C, together with its stepwise
bass leading toward the restatement of the themes opening motive, harmonize with the
general linear texturing principle rendered in the previous paragraph.116
Ex.1 IV 10 Main theme (Thematic counterpoint from 1C)
From m.89 the paragraph is prolonged by fugato-related passages, first only to a minor extent,
by using the theme's 1A and 1C motives versus single and compound/scalar tetrachords. From
116
Particularly worthy of note is also the violin part as such, which demonstrates another constructionally
significant feature of Tchaikovsky's poly-linear style: When the layer has, in practice, fulfilled its mission and
handed over the remaining material to the bass register, the composer stretches the layer until the theme is
closed, rounding it off with an arched descent. In later works this technique is at times even more elaborated.
82
m.103 (Ex.1 IV 11) the initial 1A is used imitatively in the upper strings, while the lower
strings counterpoint via a bass figuration which might be regarded as a traditional
Fortspinnung, though in the last resort it is constructed on the insignificant tetrachord
motive from the opening movement. The tetrachord of the first movement recurs in several
contrapuntal contexts in this movement, as shown further on.117
Ex.1 IV 11 Thematic counterpoint (score reduction)
This modulatory passage proceeds as a continuous build-up toward a permuted orchestral tutti
statement of 1A at m.120, followed by a microscopic transition toward the subsidiary area.
The thematic development proceeds through the stepwise half notes / syncopated quarter
notes stemming from the Main Theme's inverted 1C (Ex. 1 IV 12). The constant Fortspinnung
of the tetrachord cell contributes in enhancing the contrapuntal effect. Noteworthy is also the
structure of the layers as such, above all, as in this example, the elegant arch which forms the
cello/bass layer: Its ascending part is built upon I:1A2a, its descent on 1C before it continues
with 1A.
Ex. 1 IV 12 Thematic counterpoint (score excerpt)
117
Some commentators have had problems finding an argument for the tetrachords (I: 1A2a), and thus missed
the inter-movement relationship in this respect. A. Peter Brown fails to see the thematic relevance and
importance of this cell in A. Peter Brown: The Symphonic Repertoire Volume III Part B (Indiana University
Press, Bloomington 2008) p.339. See further comments at the close of this chapter.
83
The ascending tetrachord has a typically Tchaikovskyan textural consequence; its strenuous
way up is rewarded as it gets the main role in the succeeding passage at mm.116-20. This type
of textural transfer links textural fields together in an extremely purposeful way.
A restatement of the Subsidiary Theme in the tonics mediant leads up to a triumphant and
architectonically elegant imitation at m.160:
Ex.1 IV 13 Thematic counterpoint (score excerpt)
The above restatement is prolonged by the equally refined semi-thematic texture rendered in
Ex.1 IV 8.
This movement is full of exiting contrapuntal craftsmanship, for the most part being of
thematic nature. The imitation built on the subsidiary theme in Ex. 1 IV 7 has been supplied
by the tetrachord from the first movement. The individual parts which constitute the imitation
are brilliantly shaped contours, each entering one step above the previous. (The fourth entry
succeeding these voices is the 2nd clarinet, at m.186). Immediately after this poly-linear
episode, a succeeding contrapuntal construction emerges from a statement consisting of
motives derived from the Main Theme at m.200 ff, this time in the minor key. From m.212
the final motive prepares the ground for the ensuing poly-linear constructions, wherein a
mixture of subtle motivic derivations makes up the basic material together with the first
movement's 1A2a. Before having a closer look at the fugatos as such, we need to give an eye
to the materials.
Motive 1D repeats itself three times in descending direction (Ex.1 IV 14 B), the second is a
permutation of the first and the third is a diminution of the second, the diminution carrying
features from the opening of the symphony (Ex.1 IV 14 c). Above all it is a strait citation of
the main Allegro Maestoso-theme (mm.85-6 in the bass instruments), in its parallel key.
Worth noticing is also the relationships between the opening themes of the outer movements;
five notes (Ex.1 IV 14 B) carry the raw material of the fugato from m.213, the initial four of
these find interrelations with each other, as demonstrated briefly in Ex.1 IV 14. The inverted
version of the first four notes from the finales main theme finds its equivalent in a motive
from the finales subsidiary/introductory theme (Ex.1 IV 14 A/B).
84
Ex.1 IV 14 Motivic relationships
When the motive from the subsidiary theme recurs in the shape of permuted inversions, the
connection between the two outer movements becomes even more apparent:
Ex.1 IV 15 Motivic permutations in the Finale, reminiscent of the work's opening theme
There are further examples demonstrating interconnections between the two outer
movements; a derivation from the first movements main theme finds its analogue variant in
the fourth movement:
Ex. 1 IV 16 Corresponding motivic development in the outer movements
The derivatives of the Main Theme's 1D interact in what might be regarded as an

extraordinarily well crafted, versatile fugato:
Ex.1 IV 17 Thematic counterpoint
85
Ex.1 IV 18 Thematic counterpoint; new motivic combinations (excerpts)
The fugato passages grow in tension until m. 272, succeeded by a transition which adheres to
the movements textural counter-linear strategy as it moves toward the recurrence of the Main
Theme in its original key. These passages constitute a veritable fountain of poly-linear
techniques. One particular incident worth mentioning is the close imitation of the
rhythmically diminished 1D' motive at mm.245-50 (Ex.1 IV 19). From m.251 the original
motive moves alongside the already intriguing counterpoint into this new simple yet
ingenious three-part continuation of the modulatory process.
(The score excerpt focuses on the main poly-linear constellations.)
86
This section continues to move seamlessly towards the restatement of the Main Theme. What
is highly characteristic of this development section is its extreme focus on substantial
counterpoint, executed by way of a constant variation of new motivic combinations within an
incessantly restless tonality.
Ex.1 IV 20 Thematic counterpoint (Score excerpt)
When Tchaikovsky revised his first symphony, he left the finale rather unchanged as opposed
to the first movement which underwent considerable revision. Tchaikovsky thus may have felt
87
very pleased with it, and it was one of the very few works he openly spoke warmly of for the
rest of his life. Nevertheless, of this Finale, David Brown is on the whole negative. In his
biography he refers to the studied display of conservatoire contrapuntal skills 118 in the
movement, without attempting to describe any such particular case in detail. On the
contrary, his general approach to the symphony until now has been that of making
comparisons to Glinka119, drawing a traditional harmonic overview of one of the
movements120 or comparing sections from new and old versions 121. These are all
admirable doings, but a detailed study on how Tchaikovskys trim little contrapuntal
syntheses, as he puts it, gives an illusion of organic growth at this point feels urgently
welcome. When Dahlhaus, on the other hand, refers to such procedures, they are
expressed to be an intensification of motivic work, a truly appropriate wording. Sometimes
it looks as though Brown adheres to opinions of previous Tchaikovsky reception without
being wholly comfortable with this situation, admitting that the contrapuntal passages are
expertly manufactured.
A peculiar characteristic with the type of Tchaikovsky reception Brown represents, is the
unwillingness or inaptitude to question whether the composers original approach in both
this finale and the first movement represents something refreshingly new as concerns
organic growth and focused development. On the contrary, he confines himself to
ascertain that the polyphonic endeavors are fundamental flaws, yet failing in every
respect to make a professional account in support of such an assertion.
David Brown sticks to Abrahams dogma that like most Russians [Tchaikovsky] had no
aptitude for organic counterpoint 122 and that the modulatory sections
(...) faced Tchaikovsky with some huge intractable lumps of music which he had no hope
of digesting into an organic symphonic structure.
We might in addition include comments made by his successor A. Peter Brown, though
the latter commentator, viewed in the light of the majority of previous reception,
represents a considerable analytical step forward as compared to his predecessor. Even so,
he copies D. Brown by finding the most extensive fugato to be one of the
miscalculations in the finale:
118
David Brown: Tchaikovsky. The Early Years, 1840-1874. (W. W. Norton & Co. Inc. 1978) p. 108
Ibid. p.104
120
Ibid. p.106
121
Ibid. p.114,115
122
Ibid. p.108
119
88
In the case of T(P), the countersubjects seem more like something out of counterpoint
exercises: scales, tetrachords, and suspensions with sequences. 123
The reader already knows that a melodist like Tchaikovsky did nothing like lapsing into
arbitrary scale-exercises and tetrachords for no obvious reason, and that the tetrachord, in
addition to the magical opening theme itself, is one of the most distinct motives in the first
theme of the first area, its inconspicuousness notwithstanding, growing in importance
throughout the finale.
Krauss's, D. Brown's and A. Peter Brown's receptions of Symphony No.1/4 become the
more conspicuous taking into account the fact that the composer revised the symphony in
1874, but kept the finale as good as unchanged: This is the same composer who had by
that time already composed Romeo & Juliet and the Second Symphony, with its muchpraised finale. D. Brown characterized parts of the finale as fundamental flaws, while
Tchaikovsky, for good reason, favored this symphony in particular for the rest of his life.
The reception concerning the counterpoints in this finale becomes even more spectacular
viewed in light of comparable comments on works by Tchaikovskys contemporaries. In
The Nineteenth Century Symphony the author on Tchaikovsky even tries to surpass
Brown, labeling mm.181-200 as a heavy-handed and painfully regular fugato 124 In line
with his predecessor D. Brown, the author describes some of Tchaikovsky's contrapuntal
creations as merely "decorative"125, presumably as opposed to "substantial". Yet both
incidents, as seen previously (Symphonies No.1/1 m. 40 ff and No.2/3 m. 450 ff) contain
nothing but strictly thematic material, and the author's description thus appears somewhat
confusing to say the least. In The Nineteenth Century Symphony only the Tchaikovsky
article contains rather extensive negative comments on the composer in question, and the
author's dealings with the contrapuntal aspect are, at best, problematic.
Another heritage from D. Brown may also be detected in the writings of A. Peter Brown:
speaking at least half-ironically of "Professor Tchaikovsky" one waits expectantly yet in vain
for an explanation of why the fugatos of the finale of No.1 "seem static". The author might,
for example, alternatively have compared Tchaikovsky's solutions with those of Bruckner's,
123
In Brahms Symphony No.1/I, m.321 ff an extremely straightforward, non-modulatory contrapuntal pattern is

sequenced six times, even without suspensions. It looks as if this rather primitive solution is, by comparison,
completely unproblematic to the same author.
124
J OSEPH KRAUSS : Tchaikovsky in The Nineteenth Century Symphony, ed. D. Kern Holoman, Schirmer
Books, London, 1997, p.306
125
Ibid., pp. 304, 309 etc.
89
Brahms's and even Beethoven's symphonic fugatos. Beethoven's fugatos, to be sure, differ
from those of Tchaikovsky. But they are not necessarily less static, and, in line with habitual
practice, these allegations are never being attempted accounted for.
In contrast to the rather negative reception of the fugato within some Anglophone circles,
theorists and critics in Russia were mainly positive. Thus it is to A. P. Brown's credit that he
quotes from a Russian review after a concert as late as 1886, in which the Russian critic is in
complete disagreement with his Anglophone colleagues and finds the grand fugato to be the
highlight of the Finale:
"The last, fourth movement of the symphony is mediocre in design, but superbly
developed; in particular, a masterly constructed fugato (...) stands out."126
2.2 Symphony No.2, The Little Russian (Final version)

2.2.1 Introduction: A Russian Backdrop for The Little Russian
The Second Symphony was composed in 1872 and had its final revisions during the years
1879-80, resulting in a total rewriting of the first movement. The works subtitle The Little
Russian derives from the extensive use of themes based on Ukrainian folk songs. Among
the first three symphonies, this work is the only one being performed with some degree of
regularity, much due to the magnificently scored finale. Stravinsky may also have contributed
to the works at least partial regularity on concert programs by including it together with his
own works on concert tours.
In his four-volume biography D. Brown, instead of examining the actual craftsmanship
exerted in the work, and in the first movement in particular, uses several pages in comparing
the original and revised versions, as to which sections are moved whereto, which section has
been totally removed etc.127In light of the vast scale of his biography, it is surprising, to say
the least, that Brown makes little effort to examine Tchaikovskys dialectically angled
orchestral style, which is striking in this movement. Even Krauss spends most of his time
126
p.341
127
David Brown: Tchaikovsky. The Early Years, 1840-1874. (W. W. Norton & Co. Inc. 1978) p. 259-64
90
comparing the two versions, making practically no attempt at revealing Tchaikovsky's

technical approach.128
2.2.1.1 Symphony No.2, movement I

Thematic material
The symphony opens with an introductory French horn solo, a modified folktune consisting of
motives which to some extent will have an impact on the ensuing first and second areas. The
introductory area is clearly influenced by Glinkas rescoring principle, although
Tchaikovsky's solutions are from a developmental point of view far from mere
inconsistent re-orchestration. The folksong's opening measure presents the most predominant
material, together with the motive in the themes third measure (the scores measure four).
But as may be observed in Ex.2 I 1, some motives are highly dependent on others; and their
interrelations are rather intricate, the simple melodic statement notwithstanding. Later this
material is for the most part referred to as Intro material:
Ex.2 I 1 Introductory Theme; motives/cells of poly-linear significance
The motive that opens this folkloric yet noble melody is the one being most drastically varied
during the movement; this is particularly valid for the sub-motive after the first note (Intro
A1a), as demonstrated in Ex.2 I 2. The Main Theme actually starts at Allegro Vivo, but most
of what follows throughout this movement originates from the introduction. Motive Intro A1z
(Ex.2 I 2c) might be regarded as a rather dramatic permutation of the Intro A and C
figurations, consequently much more substantial than just the scale passages that were
already a fingerprint of his style, as John Warrack puts it in his otherwise brief but well
formulated paragraph on the symphony129. If we look just hastily on the original motive and
its derivative, the connection may perhaps appear a little speculative, but when we divide the
Intro B-figuration into substantial cells (Ex.2 I 2b), the relation to the themes opening
128
Joseph Krauss: Tchaikovsky in The Nineteenth Century Symphony, ed. D. Kern Holoman, (Schirmer
Books, London, 1997) pp.306-7
129
John Warrack: Tchaikovsky (Hamish Hamilton, London, 1973) p 70
91
measure becomes the more apparent. Thus, technically speaking, it might possibly have been
wiser to label just the delimited cell, but Tchaikovsky links together cells in ascending
sequences throughout the movement and uses these connected cells as a recurring textural
ingredient. A similar procedure is also applied to the construction of the subsidiary theme and
is further utilized in a poly-linear construction at m.194 ff.
Categorization and exposure of motives, sub-motives and their derivatives are necessary for
acquiring an adequate picture of the contrapuntal aspects to Tchaikovskys orchestral style:
Despite the almost classical transparency of the score, one is struck with the variety by which
the composer excels in using new motivic combinations in thematically based
counterpoints.130 The Subsidiary Theme (mm.87ff.) is clearly directly interrelated with the
above introductory theme: Some motives share distinct characteristics, as, for example, the
interlinked ascending melodic cells, even though they at first sight may appear as quite
different gestalts. Usually they ascend in a winding manner instead of following a rather
straightforward linear upward procedure. Thus some inter-motivic relations can be read as an
ascending graphical construction subdivided into several plateaus. A melodic, sequenced
ascending fourth is also a predominant feature with some of these motives (notice for example
the dotted slurs in Ex.2 I 2, see above all Ex.2 I 8).
Ex.2 I 2 Motivic development and transformation
The Main Themes five opening notes share characteristics with the second motive from the
introduction; two identical notes plus two slurred stepwise descending notes plus one stepwise
note:
Ex.2 I 3 Motivic connection between the Introductory and Main Themes
130
The motives in this and similar paragraphs are noted/registered only if the composer has used them in later
contrapuntal passages. Possible motives that are not used in that manner or used merely insignificantly have
been excluded from registration. Motivic variants that recur during the movement are also labelled only when
used in a contrapuntal context.
92
The initial thematic material within the Main Area is a curved gestalt (Ex.2 I 4, m.54-60); at
first there are approximately three ascending measures, then three descending. The metric
ploy of 1A2 (m.57 ff. and 62 ff.) is later also applied to 1A1 (Ex.2 I 5) at m. 128 (Ex.2 I 14).
Ex.2 I 4 Basic material of the Main Area, mm.54ff.
The first five notes in this theme (1A1) form a widely used motive in the movement. The
ensuing 1A2-material is just about as linked to the Introductory Themes first measure as is
most of the remaining thematic fabric. Even though it is not predominant in contrapuntal
contexts, 1A2 has, to some extent, a slight impact upon the B-part of the main theme (Ex.2 I
6, m.70ff). The motive initially appearing at the anacrusis of m.67; 1B (Ex.2 I 5), is a slight
deviation of Intro A1a. This motive is immediately followed by its own permuted (retrograde)
and rhythmically augmented variant. The rhythmical intricacies within the entire Main area
are certainly interesting, but any closer examination of this parameter lies outside our focal
interest.
Ex.2 I 5 - Further motivic connection between the Main (A) and Introductory Themes
The B-part of this ternery form is thus constructed entirely by means of 1B in a most
convincingly transparent manner:
Ex.2 I 6 Main Theme B, m.66 ff.: motivic interconnection / motives for contrapuntal use
Thus, to some extent the initial motives have an impact upon the thematic material of the
entire movement. The connection between the main and subsidiary themes is underlined by
93
the fact that the quavers in both are performed respectively staccato or legato in pairs. As the
movement unfolds, some elements exchange certain characteristics: Motive 1B (Exx.2 I 5-6)
has the same phrasing staccato/legato as 1A1. After the appearance of 2B (see Ex.2 I 7)
phrased legato-staccato, 1B assumes some of 2B's phrasing features in the first transitory
passage before the development (see Ex.2 I 7c), even though the strong and weak beats will
normally be performed legato-staccato respectively.
Ex.2 7 Inter-motivic phrasing influence / development
The stepwise three-note cell, by which the Subsidiary Theme opens, is found in both the Main
and Introductory Themes. But the ascending cell-sequence is, like is the case with Intro A1z
(see Ex.2 I 2), its most predominant feature. Above all 2B (m.92) should be read as a
diminished echo of two measures of 2A (e.g. mm.89-90):
Ex.2 8 Subsidiary Theme; essential motives
The clearness, by which the poly-linear procedures in this movement eventually are carried
out, could hardly have been more architectonically clean-cut. As regards orchestration, the
various motives and their derivates are exposed in extremely transparent textures, quite often
with just a minimum of supportive, inferior material.
94
2.2.1.2 Thematically based counterpoint in the first movement

Already in his First Symphony Tchaikovsky had undertaken substantial motivic development
during the exposition of the first movement. In mm. 23-24 of the Second Symphony (Ex.2 I 9)
the original version of Intro B is utilized simultaneously with a derivative from Intro A1a;
Intro A1z. There are at least two substantial layers in this texture, conducted in a manner that
is typical of Tchaikovskys highly economical, razor-sharp textural planning: Firstly, there is
a two-part (two-layer) thematic interaction, which is supported by syncopated harmonic
material in the horns, organized as static measure-by-measure semiquaver-syncopations; notes
which serve as harmonic common-tones in an otherwise chromatic environment. The
syncopated layer was adopted from the woodwind layer of the previous texture. In addition
there is a stepwise, descending bass. In Ex.9 the focus is only on the poly-linear aspect; the
Intro B-motive from the opening themes third measure (the scores fourth measure) in the
first oboe and bassoon respectively, and Intro A1z it in the upper strings, counterpointing the
theme.
The two measures in Ex.2 I 9 are subsequently repeated in mm.25-6, transposed up one
semitone. Intro A1z is continuously yet discreetly varied and not just a copied blueprint. It is a
highly flexible devise, though always keeping its characteristics recognisable and intact. The
contrapuntal interplay between these two motives now continues over twelve measures.
Ex.2 I 9 Thematic counterpoint (only thematic layers are rendered)
It must be fair to say that this part of the Introductory Area contains some of the composer's
most predictable contrapuntal passages. Sometimes only the second half of Intro B; Intro B1b
95
(Ex.2 I 1) is used, for instance at m.27 (oboe 1 and horns I & III) and in mm.42-5 (in the
trumpets, trombones & violins) in a poly-linear construction (see Ex.2 I 11).131
From m.28 ff (Ex.2 I 10) the woodwinds present about the entire Introductory Theme,
accompanied by variations of Intro A1z, which are played by the upper strings. The Intro
A1z-procedure is applied measure by measure, regardless of the melodys construction at any
given moment.132 Subsequently the Intro A1z-motive is used as a counterpoint during a
harmonic stretto, continuously retaining its main characteristics until the transitional
figuration before the ensuing re-orchestration of the theme.
Ex.2 I 10 Thematic counterpoint (supportive material omitted)
Intro A1 is traduced in ascending sequence by the woodwinds and horns, complemented by

tremolando sixteenth-note triplets in the strings; a technique favoured by the composer in
131
Mm.35-38 exemplify to some extent thematically based counterpoint, but it is rather a borderline case; each
voice enters in form of a substantial motive, but at the next entrance the counterpoint is rather insignificant; a
broken triad. It is by far typical of Tchaikovsky to submit to this type of solution.
132
Counterpointing an entire theme with a thematically based motive or cell is a procedure often found in
Tchaikovsky. The respective motives may vary in length from the quite note-rich element in Example 2 I 10
down to the short, descending two-note cell which accompanies the love theme in Romeo and Juliet. A
procedure similar to the latter is found in Francesca da Rimini, where the love theme is counterpointed by
melodic octaves or upwardly surging semi-tones in triplets, versus the duplet melody. In these two works the
counterpoints are forecasted during a procedure approximating 'textural transfer'.
96
parts of his orchestral program music. Intro B1b fulfils a thematic arch by proceeding in
downward sequence towards a diminuendo, inheriting the Intro A1z counterpoint between
mm.42-47 (Ex.2 I 11) before fading out:
The utilization of a motive as dominating as Intro A1z over such a long stretch might possibly
appear slightly over the edge. Tchaikovsky meets this challenge by using constantly shifting
registers and changing instrumental color. Increasing harmonic tempo also helps avoiding
textural convulsion and instead achieving textural durability. The motive is carefully weighed
against the other elements in the texture; observe, for example, usage of separated registers
for each textural layer. Drawing towards a close of the introductory area, the thematic
counterpoint is further counterpointed by chromatically descending violins (mm.46-7). Here a
touch of stretto is subsequently achieved via the insertion of an abbreviated form of Intro A1z
for every quarter note, finally reaching a whispering diminuendo as the introductory theme
closes (mm.48-53). The naked presentation of the introductory folk-tune highlights its shared
motive-characteristics with the main theme, and strengthens the connection between them,
consequently functioning as an elegant transition as such.
The Subsidiary Theme opens at measure 87 (the most vital elements are rendered in Ex.2 I 8).
Motives 2A and B have inherited features from the introductory theme, while 2B is probably
the closest link between the subsidiary theme and Intro A1 and Intro A1z.133 In addition to the
association with the introductory theme, there is clearly also a link to parts of the main theme
(motive 2A2, Ex.4). From m.102 the theme is complemented by a short, over-sweetened,
133
The latter reference is a consequence of the ascending terrace-like construction which is characteristic of both
motives. Yet the cells of 2A and 2B are also interrelated: the latter is the rhythmically diminished version of the
first, read most clearly at m.116 ff (see Ex.2 I 12).
97
chromatically carved countermelody with few striking thematic connections. The statement is
subsequently ensued by the conjunct ascent at m.112 (Ex.2 I 12), which consists of an
imitative cultivation of 2A. This motive is used in close imitation, leaving a rather restless,
ambiguous harmonic impression, despite the opening violin pedal on g. Limited to just three
vital layers, the harmonically ambiguous construction is characterized by clarity and
economy. Special note should be made of the 2A-transformation with its expanding leap,
above all in the low strings.
Tchaikovsky had already commenced exploring substantial counterpoint within the Main
Area. At m.66 the woodwinds imitate each other and the violins respectively using motive 1B,
while the latter subsequently continues the motives retrograde augmentation at m.67. An
additional thematic layer based on 1B is also detectable in the lower strings, and even the
viola part has its roots in 1B material:
While one may argue that melodic seconds like 1B2b are prominent in all tonal music, it is
not the interval itself which is conspicuous here, but the deliberate, profiled and transparent
98
way by which it is embedded in the orchestral web. In any case, this cell serves as an extra
bonus in the contrapuntal web.
The above procedure recurs in eb-minor at m.128 (Ex.2 I 14) before leading towards a stretto.
One could hardly ask for more sense of economy and transparency than this example
demonstrates, surpassing even the previous in these respects: Within a context where there is
absolutely no material other than the plain motives and their sub-motives in the texture, this
economy contributes in shaping yet another episode of extreme objectivity or matter-offactness for a romantic piece134. The composers searching for clarity as regards recognizable
construction material once again manifests itself in this movement, where he, as an alternative
to motive transformation, renews the material by moving the motive by one crotchet from the
anacrusis (see also Ex.2 I 13) to the downbeat (Ex.2 I 14). Yet the metric ploy is by far the
most important quality in this episode: Every single note in this texture is traceable back to
the theme, be it in groups of eight, four or two notes:
134
The symphony was mainly written during 1873, and substantially revised in 1879-80. This movement was
drastically rewritten and abbreviated. Since then there has been an almost continuous debate concerning which
version of the first movement should be preferred. The composer Taneyev, among others, favoured the original
version. David Brown has given a comprehensive description in respect of differences between the two versions
in Tchaikovsky. The Early Years, 1840-1874. (W. W. Norton & Co. Inc. 1978) pp.257-64
99
The ensuing stretto leads toward a transition constructed from the main themes opening
measures, pollinated by an element of the Subsidiary Theme. The next example (Ex.2 I 15)
presents the opening of the development, displaying a modulatory first half of the
introductory theme, concerting against 2B. After the two ensuing measures, at m.162, a third
substantial element joins forces with the other two; motive 2A. This makes up a texture
consisting of three different thematic layers without any additional textural or harmonic
support. Special notice should be given the fact that an entire theme over approximately 12
measures is counterpointed by two different thematic layers which stand out extremely similar
to their original statements. By now we have already noticed the architectonically deliberate
textural physical direction Tchaikovsky often assigns to single motivic layers in the
contrapuntal web, regardless of the counterpointing themes properties at any given moment.
During this movement, single motives most often create an upward surge in the textures,
although ostensibly not to the extent of becoming a prevalent, recurring principle. Yet in this
opening of the development the upwardly, winding contrapuntal tendency is palpable,
representing a significant contrapuntal leap forward as compared to the comparatively unTchaikovskyan, static, sequenced procedures of the exposition:
This paragraph is subsequently transposed from Db to Eb, after which a new four-part
thematic constellation takes place; the introductory theme engages in a three-part imitative
variation, accompanied by 2B. The composer transforms the theme without for a moment
100
losing sight of the basic, original melodic material. Even this four-part contrapuntal texture
involves two melodic elements, without any addition of thematically insignificant material:
The above strategy is succeeded by the introductory theme in its original form, accompanied
by 2A (m.182-189, Ex.2 I 17). The usage of this motive has rather drastic and/or ambiguous
harmonic consequences, an effect coming close to approximating the long misterioso
transitory passages in the outer movements of the First Symphony135. The introductory
themes four opening measures are played in their original form, counterpointed by two plus
two measures of 2A, shaped as rather clean-cut, chromatic lines. Subsequently a chromatic
ascension related to 2A evolves from the violin pedal. As commented upon earlier, even the
introductory theme contains the 2A motives characteristic stepwise three-note ingredient.
The composer further consolidates the thematic control over this episode by even retaining the
quarter-note chord-progression, as the 3A-related elements in the theme, whenever optimal,
counterpoints the half-notes of the 3A voices. The result; an ambiguous, chromatically
flavored (passing-)chord progression combined with crystal clear thematic counterpoint,
without extra harmonic support, may seem daring for its time.
135
Movement 1, m. 400 ff and mvm.4; m. 374 ff
101
As compared to previous poly-linear strategies in this movement, the following example is a

somewhat more standard, imitative contrapuntal variant. As regards constructional strictness,
the counterpoints to the thematic element are, almost without exception, in stepwise motion;
in violin I formed as prolongations of the motives descent; the ascents might - at least
hypothetically - be read as inverted or retrograde forms.136 This paragraph implements the
otherwise rather underexposed main theme (Ex.2 I 18):
Ex.2 18 Thematic counterpoint (1A')
136
This type of stretto is also found in the first movement of the Third Symphony, mm. 229 ff and 251 ff. and in
the Fugue of the First Suite, four measures before G.
102
In the ensuing somewhat triumphant statement in the trombones and trumpets in mm 194-201
(Ex.2 I 19), the plateau-formed Intro A1a and Intro C have developed, via IntroA1z and both
fundamental elements of the subsidiary theme, into nearly an ascending line; 2x. It is not
unlikely that this linear variation has also come about via - or is influenced by - the ending of
the subsidiary themes counter-melody at mm.104-6.
As a consequence of the above passage, three succeeding textures involving 1A1 are
presented in relatively close imitation before the recapitulation: mm.201-5, 205-11 and 21315, with an inserted poly-linear fragment at mm.211-13, before the final re-transitory passage
at mm.213-19. The concentrated rallentando before the augmented, solemn restatement of the
main theme in mm 211-12 might be read as a dissimilation of the 2x variation: Both ascend in
triple values via easily detectible plateaus.137 The ascent in the violins in this brief transitory
passage is counterpointed by a descending, permuted cell from the Main Theme.
The high pretensions of this movement may at times seem to threaten its actual
accomplishment; the music nearly constantly aims to put rather straight forward, clear-cut
thematic elements into use via vertical thematic construction, keeping the original material
easily recognizable. Thus this piece is rather unique in the romantic era, much due to its
combination of noble folkloristic elements and easily detectable thematically based
counterpoint. These rather formal procedures give the movement a somewhat cool, distant,
even dry touch, despite the airy melodic material. This sense of architectural objectivity may
baffle concert audiences, in particular those who value Tchaikovskys later, distinctly
personal, at times emotionally charged melodies, like, for example, the subsidiary theme in
the first movement of his sixth symphony. Clearly, there are climaxes in the opening
137
It is also possible to read this ascension as a direct triplet transformation of the introductory Intro A1zelement.
103
movement of the second symphony, but they are by far excessive and certainly not
overemotional.
Thematic focus and thematic multi-focus by way of thematically based counterpoint are
central compositional features, and the latter is a predominant textural parameter in the
movement. It is quite remarkable, though, that D. Brown in his extensive biography fails to
recognize these strikingly obvious technical qualities in this movement. He mentions in just
one line the constant contrapuntal interplay in the original versions second subject138.
Concerning the new version, counterpoint is not referred to with a single word, perhaps with
the exception of the reference to the airy countermelody written above the subsidiary theme
(m.102 ff). Not only may one find counterpoint in this movement, counterpoint characterizes
it - and excessively so.
In the course of time, composers may have chosen alternative solutions as regards deviations
from the sonata principle. There is no reason why this privilege should not also be granted to
Tchaikovsky. The first movement of the Second Symphony is an extremely strict and
architectonically consistent construction, securely built on its own premises.
If this movement should appear unromantic and unsentimental, possibly even matter-of-factly
- more is yet to come in this symphony. The ensuing slow movement may hardly be
considered a particularly slow movement at all, and the third movement is a solid,
Beethovenian inspired specimen (held in much the same spirit as the scherzo of the Seventh
Symphony of the latter). When thematic counterpoints are absent in the middle movements of
Tchaikovsky's Second Symphony, one may at times observe some kind of substituting,
dialectic textural strategy, as was also the case with No.1.
138
David Brown: Tchaikovsky. The Early Years, 1840-1874. (W. W. Norton & Co. Inc. 1978) p. 261
104
2.2.2 Second Symphony, movement II

Technically the second movement embodies textural features which are highly characteristic
of Tchaikovskys orchestral style, though this movement can hardly be said to be particularly
characteristic of his expressive style. It is a reworking of a wedding march from the earlier
opera Undine. The movement is as unsentimental as the rest of this symphony, manifesting
itself as a tribute to the metier more than to sheer romantic emotionalism. Not only is it rather
unromantic for a romantic symphony; it is not even particularly slow for a slow movement
(Andantino marziale, quasi moderato), in the relative major of the symphony's home key.
One may find textural similarities between this slow movement and the scherzo from the
First Symphony. In the scherzo Tchaikovsky made extensive use of just a couple of elements,
while the procedure here is a little bit different. This rests partly on the fact that the main
theme is effectively rescored during the movement, according to the Glinkas re-orchestration
principle a procedure which, in the hands of Tchaikovsky, leads to continuous textural
development.
D. Brown claims that the movement is an extensive ternary form sooner than a symmetrical
rondo139, a deduction which is probably more plausible than the opposite. Yet the fact that his
conclusion is reached after a quite extensive discussion indicates that there may be objections
against it, since the A part is a quite compound section.140 In this essay the A-section is
subdivided as follows: A1: mm.3-10 (repeated at 11-18), A2: mm.19-27 (see Ex.44), A3:
mm.28-41 (see Ex.46). The transitory mm. 36-41 may be considered a hybrid of A1 and A3.
The movement opens with soft timpani, marching towards the theme's opening which is
presented by two clarinets in the lower register together with the first bassoon (mm.3-10),
creating an utterly dry and naked chamber-musical setting.
Ex. 2 II 1 Theme A1
139
With the movements slightly ambivalent Ternary / Quasi Rondo impression in mind it feels more satisfying
to utilize a thematic taxonomy different from the sonata-typed forms, thus referring to A B A material (and
not 1- 2 -3 material).
140
105
These measures are subsequently rescored for strings (mm.11-18), leading on to the A2subsection. An immediate comparison with the previously mentioned scherzo from the first
symphony can be made with a view to the combination of contrasting timbres and variation as
regards physical direction. Already at this stage we also notice the xe.-figuration, which is
used in various rhythmical combinations, often implying sectional imitation. Frequent
discourse between timbres, registers, contrasting direction and contrast between elements
come frequently to the fore in this movement, scored with Tchaikovskys extraordinary sense
of refined economy. The opening cell of Ex.2 II 2 (m.18 ff) will subsequently form
predominant layers in the forthcoming textures. Notice in particular the continuous renewal of
timbrally segregated, fan-shaped (architectonically related) textures. From m.20 the 2a-cell is
transported from the strings to the woodwinds.
The thematic counterpoints in these opening constructions are somewhat laid-back, bordering
to complementation:
Ex.2 II 2 Element A2: Thematic counterpoint & timbral contrast / textural factor (see also
subsequent examples in respect of textural construction)
One might argue that the violin parts of m.20, for example, represent rather commonplace
figurations, hardly worthy of being viewed as motivically important. Regarded as an isolated
phenomenon this argument would be fair enough, yet on examining the rest of the movement
one finds that the figurations are far from accidental. This assumption is verified already
during the ensuing phrase:
106
Ex.2 II 3 A2 continued; transition to A3: Thematic counterpoint & timbral contrast / textural
factor, brief textural transfer at m.27
Observe also the extremely elegant part-writing, particularly striking in the above example,
appearing as subtle shades of the 2a/2a in the strings and woodwinds respectively. These
motivic elements interact vertically together with the (more) spun out horizontal thematic
design. In sum the composer achieves a result which is extremely exemplary from a formal
contrapuntal and general part-writing perspective, which contrasts the informality of the
somewhat unpretentious melody. After a brief motivic textural transfer at m.27 the dotted A2related xe.-cell is used consecutively with strict discipline (see 2 II 4), forming a new, clearly
defined separate layer at m.28.
The technique which Tchaikovsky uses in the subsequent texture should later be employed in
dramatic passages, though in this example it is used within a lyrical context: The xe.-motive
forms a long, eloquent counterpoint to the new thematic A3-material which is first presented
in the clarinets, very much influenced by the intervals from the first statements at m.18 ff. The
flutes repeat this procedure with a slightly different interval preference, yet still arch-shaped,
which was also the case with the clarinet-version. Normally this type of procedure will later in
the composer's career imply constant ascension of a motive or a motivic idea (most often in
the upper strings) until it reaches its goal or climax in high register, where it is used
repeatedly simultaneously with motivic or thematic statements in other parts. It might even be
fair to say that such a technique will stand out as one of the fingerprints of Tchaikovskys
107
later orchestral style, for example in the outer movements of Symphonie Pathetique, and may
also be sensed, yet not exactly clearly demonstrated, in a forthcoming example (see m.103 ff).
Ex. 2 II 4 Thematic counterpoint
As may also be observed in the First Symphony and the first movement of No.2, some
textures are constructed exclusively from thematic material141 without any supporting, nonthematic voices, as the rounding off of this A3-section demonstrates. Stylizations of the linear
2a-element (originally derived from three successive, ascending theme-notes) often
counterpoint the more predominant original rhythmicized/dotted elements, either in their
original, inverted or otherwise permuted form (see Ex.2 II 5).
One should also pay notice to the un-dotted up-beats of A3; the seemingly natural fleetness of
the A3-area notwithstanding - read as un-dotted versions of A2a (see mm.34-5 of the above
example): From m.41 (Ex.2 II 5) the rhythm of the A2-counterpoint move in direction of
straight eighth-notes, which, not unexpectedly, will influence the counterpoint to the recurring
A1 from m.41.
141
This assertion may even allude to examples like 2 II 4, although the pedal does not directly affect the
contrapuntal work.
108
Ex.2 II 5 Thematic counterpoint (m.37-41; the horn-upbeat at 42 is omitted)
Thus the dotted rhythm of the last transitory measure (m.42) is smoothed into straight eights
in order to transform to a light-footed walking bass from m.43. Hence one type of
thematically rooted material is transformed to one being even further remote: an already
developed cell leaves an imprint on the continued development, read as the walking bass in
Ex.2 II 6. This type of counterpoint usually ends in the register it begins, while the transfertechnique rendered earlier - when utilized in more dramatic type of movements - usually is
driven from one register to another. Although the counterpoint in Ex.2 II 6 possibly might
appear to be unrelated to earlier significant thematic material, the transformation from dotted
eighth/sixteenth figuration to straight eights becomes quite obvious during mm.41-2. Even
though counterpoint is the major issue with this particular example, the fact that Tchaikovsky
pursues his textural dialecticism by continuously renewing the textural approach in this most
shamelessly natural and effortless manner, is quite typical and thus equally worthy of notice.
When Tchaikovsky speaks of and even demands beauty in music, he may not just refer
to the melodic aspect, but at least equally much the logical and architectonic beauty of
textural disposition. During m.41 (Ex.2 II 5 ) A1a sets its direct imprint on the texture which
starts at m.43 (Ex.2 II 6).
Ex.2 II 6 Thematic counterpoint, resulting from motivic transformation/imprint from A2,
m.41 (alternatively local counterpoint)
The folk song utilized for the middle section is a short 4 (2x2) + 4 (2x2)- measure design,
using Glinkas rescoring-principle four times, succeeded by a twenty-four- measure long
109
development. Thereafter follows a restatement of the folksong, succeeded by the re-transition.

After the heavily contrapuntal first movement, only discreet hints of thematic simultaneity
have been observed so far in this movement. In mm.57-8 Tchaikovsky creates an original
textural solution by making the woodwinds catch up with and even getting ahead of the
pizzicato melody:
Ex.2 II 7 Thematic counterpoint
The first rescoring of the new theme implements triplet-accompaniment (see Ex.2 II 8),
transparently scored for clarinet in the lower register below a dominant pedal, played by two
flutes. The triplet implementation will not be without consequences for the succeeding
twenty-eight measures: It will confirm its position as a constant, vital complementing and
transforming textural idea. At m.103 it recurs in more extensively elaborated form in a
transitory passage, then accelerates into sextuplets in combination with a new statement of the
folksong at m.111, subsequently transforming into semiquavers at m.113. Though not
melodic, the procedure may be regarded to be a textural counterpoint, a side-idea whose main
function is to complement and run alongside the thematic material. This textural complement
starts discreetly with the two flutes (Ex.2 II 8 & 9), later it is handed over to the upper strings,
growing in tension, thereafter culminating in the lower strings (Ex.2 II 12), before recurring
with strengthened vitality (Ex.2 II 13). This sustained yet unstrained textural development
makes this non-thematic idea a textural factor of notable importance.
110
Ex.2 II 8 Textural factor/complementation (until m.114)
The folk-song is restated in contrasting registers, and the register of the textural complement
must adjust accordingly. During m.68 the flutes position themselves in high register in
advance of the forthcoming, re-harmonized statement. Furthermore, discreet permuted
motivic details are now added to the original theme, like the inverted motive in the lower
violin I-part (m.69). The part-writing is strikingly disciplined in all voices, and it is quite
unproblematic to attach thematic or at least semi-thematic relevance to the five string-parts
involved, the influence may be traced above all to A2, A3 and B.
Ex.2 II 9 Hints of thematic counterpoint (in the strings) + complementing textural factor (flutes)
The folk song proceeds in the bass register from m.73. In order to achieve a credible and even
telling result, Tchaikovsky keeps pushing Glinkas principle of thematic re-orchestration,
resulting in drastic textural reorganization:142 In the next example the composer utilizes
textural counterpoint in addition to thematic counterpoints in two subsequent textures. The
triplet layer in the violins splits at measure 77, and partly transforms into two segments; the
142
By this stage, one notices that sudden, synchronous shifts in respect of textural approach are to be expected
when there is a renewal or change of elements used in the thematic contrapuntal work. In this respect
Tchaikovskys two first symphonies in particular demonstrate ultra-clear, refined textural dialectics.
111
echoing of the permuted B1a element continues in the string-layer, yet this layer now changes
dramatically into a hybrid between the previous triplet leaps, (only now the leaps are
descending) and the horizontal brass signals. One also notices that when layers change roles,
like at the m.77 junction, the new layers mainly start out from registers reached by the end of
the previous texture, and subsequently at least one of these layers change direction.
Ex.2 II 10 Thematic counterpoints + textural counterpoint
At this point it seems appropriate to underline that Tchaikovskys textural counterpoints are
usually characterized by an extremely well planned, geometric structure; most often they are
presented as pure, linear creations.143They are given a textural role, staged in the way that
they move deliberately from one place to another, which is a supreme alternative to that of
just being filled in where and whenever it suites a harmonic purpose.
Subsequently the counter-directional principle is pushed even further by way of one
compound, purely thematic layer and one carrying the textural counterpoint, at first in the
woodwinds and lower strings respectively, as rendered in the following score-excerpt. Not
only are the textural principles involving contrary motion, register change and
timbral/instrument change carried out most convincingly clear; notice in addition the dramatic
transgression from textural to thematic counterpoint in the lower strings at mm.82-3 and vice
versa in the high woodwinds:
143
Thus triplets in the shape of, for example, more or less static arpeggios which above all are remnants from
the classical period would have had minimal textural, contrapuntal impact, unless there was a distinct quality
attached to such a layer, like, for example, in way of direct or immanent physical direction.
112
Ex.2 II 11 Thematic and Textural counterpoint (The bassoons double the lower strings, horns 3&4
double the clarinets 8vb)
The above transformation of B2 (violins, mm.83-4) leads into a culminating passage at m.85
which starts as imitative counterpoint between the brass and the woodwinds:

(The horns I & II double the trumpets in 8va b and the 1st bassoon doubles the 1st obo in 8v b)
After a rescoring of B1, wherein the composer utilizes inverted thematic counterpoint, the
triplet-factor is counterpointing a rather disguised B2 in a transitory passage from m.97
toward the restatement of A1. The previously mentioned deliberate use of ascending and
descending layers is demonstrated convincingly by the composer even in this passage. There
is a stretto effect associated with this passage, much due to a subdivision of the triplets (Ex.2
II 13), and one may with some justification claim that there is a developmental aspect also
attached to the textural factor which counterpoints the thematic development. After ten
measures the texture is transformed into still more sparkling effect in the flutes and clarinets
(m.113 ff). The textural counterpoint is equally predominant as is the thematic material, and is
given special attention in the following excerpt via deliberate use of shifting physical
direction and rhythmic intensification.144The textural factor has by now become an articulated
counterpoint of, at least, temporary character:
144
Similar figurations are used in a corresponding textural plan and development in Marche Slave, commencing
at approx. m.36. That work was written between the original and revised versions of Symphony No.2.
113
Ex.2 II 13 Textural / local counterpoint (continued development of the triplet layer)

(Doublings/octaves are excluded in this example)
The broken chords between mm.113-16 are not excessively interesting as an isolated
phenomenon, and must be viewed as a developmental textural consequence of the far more
virile and constructionally interesting triplets and sextuplets, formed as ascents or descents.
Even during the ensuing apparently plain tutti re-orchestration of the A1 march-theme,
Tchaikovsky enables to maintain dialectic focus, achieved via the syncopated q q q e_in the
trumpets, reminiscent of the previous eighth-note after-beat pedal in the cellos and basses.
Earlier in this paragraph on the second movement comparisons were drawn to the scherzo
from the First Symphony regarding selected textural procedures. As was also the case with the
scherzo, this extremely unbiased second movement dies out by means of faint timpani-beats
just the way it started and with a simultaneous motivic fragmentation in the remaining
orchestra.
Even though appearing as different orchestral procedures, interaction between the textural
factor and the thematic material manages to create dramatic change of mood and color. Their
mutual impact as they move up or down, into or away from focus, may lead to effective
contrasts, yet these contrasts are the result of a pan-textural approach.
114
Second Symphony, movement III

Tchaikovskys symphonic scherzos may stand as noteworthy examples of high class refined
architecture. The scherzo of the Second Symphony is above all a study of rhythmic invention,
combined with much of the strict textural construction found in the scherzo of the First
Symphony. In No.1 there was a recycling of phrases, implying and demanding a constant
renewal of textural solutions. In the scherzo from No.2 the procedure is different, yet some
textures seem similarly constructed. Stringent passages rhythmically knit together by a
combined 1+2/2+1 formula, are particularly notable from m.14ff. Such constructions succeed
each other throughout the movement, and the momentum of rhythmic and textural surprise is
present throughout. The scherzo from the Second Symphony is even more something of a
multi-focus construction than that of the No.1,145 and combinations of predictable as well as
more restless, presumably less predictable events occur frequently. In the following excerpt
the chromatic descent in the middle strings is contrasted by the bouncing double quavers in
the winds and the remaining strings.
The movements outer sections are constructed by means of small, characteristic cells. Since
the opening statement contains rhythmically complementing layers, thematic counterpoint is
to some extent present throughout the movement. But in addition these constructions often
possess extended textural multi-focal qualities, as demonstrated in the following example,
where both layers stem from the opening theme. One layer; the violas and second violins, is
constructed by extreme voice-leading, another by its unpredictability and bouncing contrast as
regards sound-color and registers:
Ex.2 III 1 Textural counterpoint
(2+1 eighth-notes: linear / 1+2; nonlinear, contrasting colors, contrasting registers)
145
In this respect the present scherzo bears some resemblance with the masterful scherzo of the Third Suite,
particularly as a consequence of its triplet drive, even though textural sub-parameters between the two
movements differ.
115
Combination of stable and unstable elements is also characteristic of the following

excerpt. Both examples utilize fluctuant, shifting woodwind combinations by means of
contrasting registers, contrasting the more thematically linear and stable strings. The present
texture consists of (at least) three predominant layers: 1: the rushing, unstable sixteenth-note
figurations of the woodwinds, 2: the thematically derived first violins with their stepwise
upwardly syncopated striving, harmonically challenging the remaining layers, and 3: the
stepwise descending and rhythmically contrasting lower strings, read as the opening theme's
inversion (Ex.2 III 2). Some might perhaps even wish to include the relatively anonym middle
strings as a fourth, easily perceptible layer. Both the first violin- and the woodwind-layers
also owe much of their existence to the movement's introductory run in the cellos and basses,
thus being highly thematic.
Ex.2 III 2 Thematic & textural counterpoints
This rhythmic ambiguity is one of the central issues of this movement; in Example 2 III 3 the
hemiola aspect is renewed in combination with countermovement, ensuring three thematically
derived layers above the pedal, in the violins and the violas respectively. Except for the first
violins, these string-layers are doubled by woodwinds, thus highlighting the rhythm and
thematic aspects (at the expense of timbral contrast). This textural procedure stretches from
m.84 to 104:
116
Ex.2 III 3 Thematic counterpoint (Doublings in the woodwinds are omitted)
The central trio is in most respects inferior to the main scherzo part as regards textural
refinement, yet occurrence of sharply contoured individual layers is nevertheless detectable.
The themes second statement has got a plain yet well crafted local counterpoint written to it,
formed in a distinct Tchaikovskyan manner; formed as a long arch. The folk-tune has a metric
2+2+2 subdivision.146
Ex.2 III 4 Local counterpoint
The above texture is immediately succeeded by contrasting timbre combinations,

simultaneously rewarding the listener with subtle contrapuntal treatment via the parallel
inversion and inverted augmentation of a Trio-cell, possibly giving the augmented version the
impression of appearing in slow motion. (A variation of this technique was seen in Ex.2 II 7.)
This episode is Tchaikovskyan to the core, combining textural economy with motivic
concentration. In addition to these microscopic yet highly refined counterpoints, the cello &
bass layer is not solely a trio-theme variation. At the same time the slow chromatic ascent
simultaneously hints at a twisted permutation of the opening scherzo theme. As an extra
bonus, the overall ascending chromaticism of this texture creates an extremely plastic
harmonic ambiguity:
146
Connection lines might also be drawn between this theme and 1B-vatiants of the Finale.
117
Ex.2 III 5 Thematic counterpoint (Trio, after the second statement)
The immediate continuation adds a new edition of the trio's initial local counterpoint to the
already established thematic counterpoint; now the thematic counterpoint of the first phrase is
in contrary motion:
Ex.2 III 6 Thematic & local counterpoint
In the coda Tchaikovsky connects elements from the trio with the remaining scherzo, without
involving elements from the two sections in contrapuntal display to any notable extent.
David Brown gives a fair, though general review of this short scherzo, starting his
discussion by assuming that the rhythmic verve of the scherzo in Borodins First Symphony
served as a model for Tchaikovsky, but finally concluding that Tchaikovskys piece differs
from Borodins in most respects.147 But for all we know, not only the rhythmic verve but even
some textural ideas in Borodins movement, like, for example, his poly-directional passages
may have inspired Tchaikovsky to further, more excessive cultivation in his own work.
Though, as opposed to Borodin, Tchaikovsky does not choose to completely let go of neither
the constant propulsion nor the dry wit in the middle trio.
147
David Brown: Tchaikovsky. The Early Years, 1840-1874. (W. W. Norton & Co. Inc. 1978) p.258-9.
118
2.2.4 Symphony No.2, Movement IV

The finale of the Second Symphony is the most frequently discussed of all the movements
constituting the first three symphonies, much thanks to the orchestral. This movement, highly
acclaimed by The Mighty Handful, is often, for example in D. Browns biography, said to
owe much of its success to the Kamarinskaya-principle. But Glinkas procedure is carried
markedly further by Tchaikovsky in this finale, much due to the latters slightly more restless
key-shift, and even more as a result of an effective sonata principle, implying active interplay
between two contrasting themes.148 In addition of providing a sound textural disposition,
Tchaikovsky was presumably well aware that he would have to make frequent use of brief
excursions to new tonalities in order to avoid tonal monotony. Excessive theme-repetitions as
such represented in fact a notable symphonic challenge, and might easily come into conflict
with fundamental symphonic principles, especially on a developmental basis.
The stately introduction, based upon the folksong The Crane, which is the movements
main theme, may very well have inspired Mussorgsky to the creation of The Great Gate at
Kiev. The strings are lavishly provided with double-, triple- and quadruple-stops as the
unveiling of the thematic material proceeds. In the following excerpt only two voices from the
full orchestra are presented; during this massive, chorale-like introduction - a premature,
modulatory variation of the still unveiled theme - the thematic material of the upper voices is
counterpointed imitatively by the lower voices from measure 10:
Ex. 2 IV 1 Thematic counterpoint
148
Even so, the greatness of Kamarinskaya rests, above all, on Glinkas varied technique per se, more than on
the actual accomplishment of that peculiar work: Glinkas disposition is not entirely unproblematic since there is
an accumulation of compound texturing already in the introductory Wedding Song; From the High Mountains
and also in the introductory statement of the main dance tune (Kamarinskaya), while later variations are, in
general, harmonically, as well as texturally, surprisingly monotonous by comparison.
119
After three re-orchestrations of 1A in the tonic and one statement of 1B in the dominant, 1A is
stated once more in C with a nimble wandering cello-pizzicato counterpointing it (Ex.2 IV 2).
This statement is mentioned only since it is a regularly used Tchaikovskyan orchestral
procedure, although not excessively. Wanting in thematic reference it is rather inferior from a
contrapuntal point of view, the counterpoint not unexpectedly moving in contrary motion to
the theme:
Ex. 2 IV 2 1A statement & Local counterpoint / background variation
In his biography Brown makes a comment regarding the originality of the folksong as it
appears in Tchaikovskys work, which, for the record, ought to be rendered in this connection
(this material forms the basis of what is labelled 1B material):
The second half of `The Crane', as set out in the Mamontova collection 149 of children's
songs, which Tchaikovsky had just harmonized, differs from the version in the symphony. The
discrepancy is obviously due, at least in part, to Tchaikovsky himself, but the butler at
Kamenka, who was evidently exasperated by what he thought was a faulty delivery of the tune,
also made a contribution which Tchaikovsky cheerfully acknowledged. `Credit for the success
[of the finale with the audience at the first performance] I do not ascribe to myself, but to the
real composer.... Pyotr Gerasimovich who, while I was composing, and strumming through
"The Crane", constantly came up and hummed: (1B)
a version which was presumably in Tchaikovsky's mind when he composed bars 113-16.150
1B recurs at m.65, totally rescored and re-harmonized. The composer now employs a
persistent, importunate and obstinate thematic cell, forming a counterpoint which attracts
considerable attention in the first bassoon (Ex.2 IV 3). The contrast between the theme and its
counterpoint is enhanced as the result of the formers pentatonic construction (Obo I) versus
the chromatic counterpoint of the latter, and variations of this passage are to some extent
traceable in forthcoming variations. The immediate continuation (Ex.2 IV 4) of the
149
M. A. Mamontova, A Collection of Children's Songs on Russian and Ukrainian Melodies, harmonized

by Tchaikovsky, No. 18
150
120
derived chromatic two-note cell might be read as an imprint of the counterpoint from the
variation rendered in Ex.2 IV 3.
Ex. 2 IV 3 Thematic counterpoint (1B material)
According to Brown, the succeeding texture is most probably transferred directly from
Glinka:
The pungent little appoggiatura figure that accompanies one statement of the theme is
patently suggested by the obstinate `wrong note' pedal of one Kamarinskaya variation, a
model which is copied even more explicitly and at far greater length in the
development151
Yet the wrong note attracts so much attention at its first presentation as to become,
eventually, just as important as the theme itself, and the two re-harmonized versions (Ex.2 IV
4 & 5) prepare for the whole-tone scale in the bass which will turn up later (see also Ex.2 IV 7
& 8). Hence the wrong note might be read as a phenomenon taking part in a developmental
procedure; compare, for example, the following bass, deriving from 1B, with the bassooncounterpoint of Ex.2 IV 3, in particular mm.65 & 69:
151
121
In the previous example, the wrong note is, unlike the Kamarinskaya-reference, the flattened
sixth, while Glinkas (flattened) seventh is immediately introduced in Tchaikovsky's ensuing
passage (Ex.2 IV 5).152 The flattened b moving down a half step leaves the impression of
suspension - resolution, which in turn might be felt like an unstable submediant as compared
to the previous tonic. Yet the c pedal and consequent use of the flattened seventh
simultaneously leaves a mixolydian impression to this variation. Much more important,
though, is the fact that the two note cell has come into use as an obvious thematically derived
1B-ingredient after a convincingly clear procedure.
The following dance-tune statements are created in a rather straightforward manner, yet
thematic counterpoint, like the imitative variation in Ex.2 IV 6, occurs. Constant variation by
means of new, additive orchestration appears, manufactured in accordance with the remaining
transparent textures, together with imitative thematic layers. The afterbeat-effect, here
produced by the pizzicato pedal, has been a constantly recurring yet texturally developing
accompanimental factor to 1A from its first variation until now.
152
The sevenths and sixths, though irreproachably resolved, might be felt like pedals, much in the same way as
in Glinkas harmonization of Kamarinskaya. Yet the sum of the thematic two-note combinations and the
obsessive, focused syncopations constitute a result being far more dialectical than Glinka's static Kamarinskaya
pedal. In addition, the syncopations might clearly be read as a rhythmic reinterpretation of the afterbeataccompaniment of the introductory variations.
122
The composers threat - or promise - of turning the C-major scale into a whole-tone scale
comes closer to being realized as the first four notes in the first violins obtain the
characteristic of the major- (and whole-tone) scales first three notes, and the first four pitches
in the bass substitute the remaining whole-tone scale; these four bass-notes constitute a
permuted inversion of the first four notes of the theme (Ex.2 IV 7). The melodic and harmonic
contexts still rest on the C-major-side (tonic / flattened submediant), but the progression
succeeds in establishing a more ambivalent, two-sided tonal focus in addition to that purely
thematic.
It might be accidental or it might be a deliberate action taken by the composer to draw a faint
connection line back to the opening movement by way of giving the opening of the main
theme some shade or hint of the 2B figurations of the first movement:
Ex.2 IV 8 Hint of inter-movement connection/motivic transformation
This transition toward the subsidiary theme (starting at m.141) finally reaches the foretold
whole-tone scale in the bass at mm.163-6, although the harmonization is not whole-tonebased. The phrases of the upper layers extend over four (2+2) measures; 161-4 & 165-8
respectively, while the whole-tone scale crosses this junction / continues its descent at 164-5.
By adding the momentum of cross-directional layers Tchaikovsky securely maintains his ever
so varied textural two-sidedness. There is a palpable, clean and unromantic sachlichkeit about
the symphony, about this movement and this passage in particular, with its implicit melodic
whole-tone combinations.
123
Ex.2 IV 9 Thematic counterpoint (The woodwinds double the strings. The basses are doubled by the
trombones & tuba.)
Melodic contrary motion is pursued also during the presentation of the relatively contrasting,
calm subsidiary theme. The themes initial syncopated, descending fundamental line, played
by the first violins, counterpoints elegantly the ascent in the violas, the latter together with
the second violins accentuate on the succeeding downbeat and elements of the theme. The
attention is drawn just as much towards this counterpoint as to the theme itself (Ex.2 IV 10).
The counterpoint in the second violins has much in common with some of the bass
counterpoints of the Main Area; a repeated, obstinate, rocking, chromatic two-note cell, yet
here the syncopations come in the theme itself, not its counterpoint. Thus this layer is by no
means without thematic relevance, and might alternatively have been labelled as such.
Ex.2 IV 10 Thematic counterpoint (from the opening of the subsidiary theme)
The subtle rhythmic nuance is investigated further in the second statement, this time by
implementing the theme-syncopation for contrasting effect in the lower voice and at the same
time by retaining the ascending stepwise motion in the counterpoint, elegantly rounded off on
the top by a brief descent. Worthy of notice is even the construction of the third thematic
layer, represented by the horns, which might be regarded as a stylized, re-rhythmification of
the concurrent syncopated counterpoint:
124
The above excerpt provides a representative example of how the composer sometimes enables
to create an architectonically well-formed construction within which each layer complements
the remaining layers in respect of rhythm, contrary motion and harmonic completion, without
having to incorporate supportive layers.
In the ensuing variation (m.234 ff) Tchaikovsky increases the textural tension by utilizing
thematic counterpoint in a brief imitative passage:
Ex.2 IV 12 Thematic counterpoint (doublings/octaves omitted)
Contrary motion, so widely used by Tchaikovsky, is also applied thematically from m.277, in
a brief modulatory dominant chain, evolving as a natural consequence of some of the linear,
thematically based counterpoints of this exposition. This contrapuntal construction could
hardly have been executed more thematically purified, transparent and effective.
Ex.2 IV 13 Thematic 1A-counterpoint (Excerpt from tutti)
125
A characteristic feature associated with some of Tchaikovskys orchestral climaxes is his

predilection for moving an ascending layer often formed by motivic elements to a,
relatively, high register, and let it stay there as an accompaniment for a thematic statement,
previously referred to as a textural transfer procedure. Normally this kind of textural layer is
favored the strings and the technique is very well depicted in this finale. From m.289 (Ex. 2
IV 14) the two consecutive and repeated quavers (the Pyotr Gerasimovich element, see,
for example, m.51 ff) climb to a higher register and stay there while the trumpets perform
a variation of 1A. The deviated measure of the theme (m.296) conforms in accordance
with the cell constituting the counterpoint. Thus the persistent and consequent use of the
appoggiatura cell makes it almost as predominant as the theme itself:
Ex.2 IV 14 Textural transfer/ thematic counterpoint (Extract from tutti)
In stark contradiction to the multifarious linear, stepwise procedures carried out during the
main part of the exposition, the last transitory measures toward the development section is a
succession of odd unisons. Brown finds these notes to be reminiscent of the previously
commented wrong note153, a deduction which is probably only partly correct, since the
notes also attract special attention in their capacity of appearing as splashes of shifting tonecolor. The latter quality, together with the huge downward leaps, is in fact thematically based,
as an echo from the rounding off of the Main area (mm.191-8).
Ex.2 IV 15 1A element h_h-leap-h_h (Further connection; see also Exx.2 IV 16, (17), 18, 20-22)
153
126
This idea will continue to strengthen its position and frequently show up in capacity of an
audacious, at times somewhat dissonant idea, refusing to resolve. From m.326 to 327, for
example, the bass has the dominants seventh, moving down a minor tenth. In the first of
these passages it acts together with a variation of the main theme (Ex.35).
Yet mostly this tones capacity of standing out as a noteworthy, explicit phenomenon is
achieved by appearing in constantly new dashes of timbre. In the below constellation together
with the subsidiary theme, the cell is exposed only by the characteristic variation in tonecolor, while the large melodic leaps are reduced or even absent. A third, distinctly contoured
layer in this texture appears in the shape of a conjunct, ascending, fairly chromatic pizzicato
in the second violins, which represents an additional side of Tchaikovskys sharply designed
textural dialectics, a layer which is above all associated with previous linearly designed
counterpoints derived from both themes.
Ex.2 IV 17 Thematic counterpoints
As the development proceeds the syncopated rhythm of the subsidiary theme is playing an
increasingly important role. The majority of involvements made by this rhythmic element
contain thematically derived stepwise lines, as in the above Vn.II-voice. In the next example
the [h_h-leap-h_h] cell is diminished to [h-leap-h], thus speeding up the harmonic tempo. At the
same time the intervals are expanded, an act being more in accordance with its motivic origin,
and the subsidiary theme is being stylized into descending lines:
127
Ex.2 IV 18 Thematic counterpoint (The bassoons & lower strings play f throughout)
The fourth thematically based contrapuntal passage of the development consists of a permuted
version of the subsidiary theme confronted with 1A in a new modulatory sequence,
whereupon both textures are repeated in transposed versions.
Ex.2 IV 19 Thematic counterpoint (Extract/reduction from tutti)
As was the case with the previous examples, there is also a melting together of characteristics
between the two themes during the succeeding variations. In the following example there is a
motivic transformation of 1A's opening in the treble system154, counterpointed by a continued
elaboration of the subsidiary theme - much in line with the previous texture - in the bass.
Already at this stage one might be tempted to argue that the successive chain of thematically
highly stylized contrapuntal solutions explored by the composer in this finale is unrivalled for
its time - alternatively one might ask which work that could possibly be.
Alternatively, the composer makes combinations by amalgamating the subsidiary themes

rhythmic characteristics with 1A's [h_h-leap-h_h] cell, juxtaposed with a closer variation of 1A
proper, as from m.429:
154
There are several ways of associating these four notes with the opening of 1A; one is to regard them to be
both rhythmic as well as melodic augmentations of the four opening notes; reading them as a plain, cadencial
(plagal) manifestation is another.
128
Ex.2 IV 21 Thematic counterpoint (Extract/reduction from tutti)
Further thematic discourses related to the above example continue developing, leading into
strettos, first between mm.445-54, then accelerating between 453-6 (Ex.2 IV 23). From m.445
the leaping free note cell in the lower voice is rhythmically diminished, while the main
theme in the upper voice is rhythmically unchanged, a contrapuntal solution previously
chosen also for the subsidiary theme.
Until now the composer has chosen modulations of the four-measure long thematic phrases to
the submediant, subdominant or, as here, to the super-tonic.
The leaping free note cell of the recent examples in the bass registers subsequently moves
in direction of combining 1A's opening interval, presented by two paired, adjacent notes
(vaguely associated with the highly substantial two-note cell of Ex.2 IV 3) together with the
cells characteristic unorthodox and unpredictable leaping behaviour. From m.453 the 'free'
note, the chords seventh is, as a consequence, operating quite freely in the bass, leading
diatonically up to the chords roots, instead of the expected downward resolution:
129
Before the recapitulation there is a variation containing three substantial layers; 1A is treated
to imitative counterpoint, combined with the excessively used inverted, stylized scale element
in the horns. This time the composer chooses to move his four-measure phrase to the subtonic:
From mm.493 this procedure is applied together with a new harmonization above a dominant
pedal in a tutti fortissimo.
Just the way various forms of textural dialectics are highly characteristic of Tchaikovsky, the
counterpoint achieved by using the [h_h-leap-h_h] cell is uncharacteristic. Yet this cell creates
strikingly contrasted counterpoints against the remaining scale-dominated thematic material.
Needless to say, counterpointing a "free" or "libero" note should not at all suggest a notable
technical challenge to an experienced composer; sooner, it is the idea in itself which is
extraordinary. Thus the approach completely contrasts the expertly executed fugato-passages
in the finale of No.1. The pure, unromantic and clean-cut way by which the development in
No.2 IV is carried out might very well be one of the reasons why Stravinsky chose to conduct
the symphony on tour and even record it.155The bare, unveiled procedure is most daring for a
finale of a romantic symphony, and one may, on the whole, regret that Tchaikovsky did not
pursue this path later in his symphonic career, as is also commented by D. Brown. 156The
question, though, remains whether a continued and constant highlighting and repetition of this
quite rigid procedure, though encompassing enormous technical possibilities, looked
particularly tempting for the creative mind. It is a great paradox, though, that Tchaikovskys
pursue of Glinkas re-orchestration angle in many of his other movements even when
155
156
Igor Stravinsky conducts the Los Angeles Philharmonic Orchestra in this work on PASC101.
130
carried out to a much lesser extent than here is a procedure for which some commentators
criticise him.
And still, this symphony represents much more than Russian lore, which was also
Tchaikovskys intention: Richard Taruskin concretizes this issue with the following wording:
Owing to the use of this tune [The Crane] in the finale, Chaikovsky's symphony is now widely
known as the "Little Russian" symphony and has been touted, particularly by British writers, as
evidence of the "High Nationalism" the feckless composer would soon traduce. But the great
value of high nationalism in Russian music is something Westerners are more likely to preach
than Russians to practice. For Westerners it was an exotic feature; only during the era of Soviet
xenophobia was it preached from the Russian side. For nineteenthcentury Russians, especially
Russians who, like Chaikovsky, saw themselves as Europeans, it was something that only marked
them off as alien and inferior, denizens of a ghetto. The myth of Russian autochthonism was
something Chaikovsky grew to detest and, as his life went on and his fame grew, more and more
to resist.157
The constructional techniques used by Tchaikovsky in this finale not only surpass the borders
of High Nationalism; they demonstrate technical brilliance and highly original approaches of
transparent poly-linear construction, combining orchestral inventory and thematic focus with
counterpointing thematic layers. In this work the composer exceeds the borders of sheer reorchestration by a wide margin. The developments of the outer movements are almost
exclusively constructed from thematically based counterpoint, and so are considerable parts of
the expositions.
157
Taruskin, Richard; On Russian Music (University of California Press, 2008), p.129
131
2.3 Symphony No. 3 in D, opus 29 (composed 1875)

The nickname The Polish, which has been stuck on The Third Symphony, apparently
originates from the conductor Sir Alfred Manns, triggered by the finales Tempo di Polacca.
But the symphony might just as well have been subtitled The German because of the Alla
Tedesca movement or even The Academic because of the restrained, unsentimental Tempo
di marcia funebre introduction with its succeeding Allegro brillante, the latter somewhat dry
and subdued rather than brilliant, lively or sparkling. David Brown comments thus on the two
outer movements:
The movement that opens the symphony is far more interesting [ than the finale], though
its development succumbs to that same rhythmic turgidity and contrapuntal pedantry that
weighs so heavily on the finale. 158
Usually Tchaikovsky is accused of being sentimental and hyper-romantic, but here it seems
opportune to charge him with being the complete opposite.
Most biographers and critics have proclaimed this symphony to be one of Tchaikovskys least
successful as regards inter-movement connection, therefore it might be interesting to take a
closer look at the work with this verdict in mind, in addition to the contrapuntal issue. Evans,
in his biography, finds that this Symphony is not of overwhelming interest, though there
are some mitigating factors:
Both in contrapuntal resource and in instrumental coloring, however, considerable advance can
be detected.159
Evans does not account for how or to what extent the considerable advance in contrapuntal
resource manifests itself, nor does he put the contrapuntal issue into perspective in his overall
dealing with the symphonies.
The Third Symphony was written shortly after the First Piano Concerto and completed at the
time the composer started writing Swan Lake. Taking into account the success of its
predecessor The Little Russian one might feel at least a bit surprised that the composer was
not tempted to pursue this line, since the Third Symphony has only insignificant references to
Russian lore. David Brown may be right in making the following assumption:
There can be no doubt that Nikolay Rubinstein's strictures on his [Tchaikovskys] most
recent symphonic work, the First Piano Concerto, still rang in his ears, and he was determined
that this new piece should not be open to charges of technical or structural inelegance (...) 160
David Brown: Tchaikovsky. The Crisis Years, 1874-1878. (W. W. Norton & Co. Inc. 1983) p.42
Edwin Evans: Tchaikovsky (J. M. Dent & Sons Ltd, London, 1966 rev.) pp.111-12.
160
158
159
132
If A. and N. Rubinstein, one way or another, convinced the composer that the Russian
element was a dead end when it came to symphonic writing, their lack of comprehension,
appreciation and acceptance of Tchaikovskys highly original output from his former period
may in fact have resulted in a change of artistic direction, although the Russian folk song or
dance rhythm did not completely vanish until the Sixth Symphony.
The Third Symphony was composed with considerable speed in the summer of 1875. But
after its completion the composer must have felt that suppression though not total
elimination of the Russian element in a cyclic work, was an overreaction: Even though the
extrovert manifestation of such an element should never again become as predominant as in
the Second Symphony, Russian presence is sensed in the majority of Tchaikovsky's works
until the Sixth Symphony.
The somewhat formal stiffness of the opening movement and apparent lack of congruence
between the five movements may, at least partly, explain the symphonys low esteem among
the majority of Tchaikovsky biographers. The opening movement may indeed be
characterized as the most reserved and withheld of all Tchaikovskys main symphonic
movements. Yet as a consequence of this suggestion it would be self-contradictory and totally
unfair to blame Tchaikovsky for being an inescapable romantic on one occasion, only to
accuse him of being the complete opposite on another, the former opinion usually being
predominant with most commentators.
Tchaikovsky is, particularly in this symphony, much more than the archetype of the overromantic composer, and the work is highly contrapuntal. Even more important: the
composers predilection for poly-linearity reveals itself not only by the very presence of a few
fugato-passages, but much more in the way he makes use of a variety of dialectical texturing
on a wider scale, something which, at this point, should not surprise the reader. Motivic
exploitation and development, though, is on an overall basis more obscure in this work than in
his remaining six numbered symphonies.

In his third symphony the composer is not quite as eager to engage in contrapuntal activity in
the exposition as he has proved to be in his earlier symphonies. D. Browns conception of
symphonic writing appears to be somewhat rigid in this respect, proclaiming that thematic
133
developments must be kept for their proper place, the development itself161, although he
must probably have been aware that a corresponding approach is also found in Brahms.
The introduction, though held in the tempo of a funeral march, is not particularly tearful.
The motives conceived in this introduction are later recognized slightly transformed
during the exposition, the D cell (Ex.3 1), is highly applicable in most situations, last but
not least in dominant 7-, 9- and b9-chords. Both the marcato onset of this cell, the
syncopation, the flattened super-tonic and the via pauses isolated demarcation single
out this cell as something more than the almost unavoidable half-tone connection one may
expect to find in the majority of musical themes. Motivic or possible motivic variations
and derivatives seem more strained in this work than in the remaining six symphonies.
Ex.3 1 Introductory Theme
Tchaikovsky inserts something which looks like a local counterpoint in the subsequent
restatement (m.9 ff, Ex.3 2), but which may equally valid be interpreted as a stylized
variation of Intro B1's zigzag pattern (m.10 ff); the insertion of a distinct counterpoint
which is conducted with utmost discipline within the texture. Even if we should choose
not to attach thematic qualities to the layer, alternatively labeling it Intro F, it does not
work as an incidental supplement to the thematic motives, but as an organic self-assumed
unit within the texture. It adds a hazy complement to the more pedantic motives in this
actual passage. Thus it functions very much in the same way as the descant tremolando
fluctuations in the introduction of the First Suite, a piece which is also in d-minor, where
the counterpoint complements the elements which later form the fugue theme. The
counterpoint in both cases enters and exits in ascending and descending direction
respectively, thus pursuing their own organic rise and fall. This approach, though, is being
more thoroughly worked out in the Suites introduction (as part of the Introduction &
Fugue) than is the case in this very short fragment in the Third Symphony. The melodic
161
134
construction of these triplets by means of melodic seconds reappear in movements two,

three and five (see for example Exx.3 29, 30, 33 and 45-47), but in the later movements
some might possibly wish to read it as an extensively worked out textural ingredient and
consequently label it as such. This triplet cell is predominant in the solo bassoon theme in
the third movement162 and serves as textural counterpoint on several occasions.
Compare also the phrase-endings of the horn theme of the opening movement (mm. 9-12,
Ex.3 2) with the bassoon theme in the middle movement's mm.10 - 12 (see footnote). The
composer makes further explorations of these elements later, especially in the finale.
Ex.3 2 Thematic counterpoint (Score extract; without the cellos & basses and pedal.)
As compared with the first two symphonies there is a tendency toward a more withheld
thematic renewal and development in this introduction. The introductory theme is restated
over a dominant bass pedal via changing tone color, supported by rather straightforward
local contrapuntal work, the latter by means of a Tchaikovskyan trademark: wandering
pizzicato strings complementing the theme (mm.17-32), once again formed like an arch.
This passage dissolves at Poco meno mosso, leading to the transition toward the Main
Theme. This transition amalgamates elements from the past as well as the future; the
Introductory and the forthcoming Main Theme. 163The four notes of the thematic basscounterpoint from in the modulatory passage from m.66ff, for example, represent the four
opening pitches of the main theme.
The theme itself (Ex.3 3) owes parts of its origin to the introductory motives:
162
163
Although the upwardly striving 1A3 is a consequence of its two preceding measures as well as 1A2 and partly
1A1, it is at times more practical to handle it as a specific motive during the following poly-linear analysis.
135
Ex.3 3 Main Theme, opening:
In advance of the statement of the main theme, an extended dominant preparation ( Molto
pi mosso) had created yet another halt in the propulsion. Nonetheless, the beginning of
the transition was constructed as a hybrid by elements from the introductory theme (Ex.3
1) and the forthcoming main theme, particularly its phrasing (Ex.3 3) in close i mitation.
The ascending semi-sequential transition gradually becomes somewhat predictable, and
one may even at this stage start to worry whether the thematic material, perhaps not
characterized by the composer's customary originality, will cause him inescapable
discomfort. But Tchaikovsky avoids such a pitfall, adding new motivic elements to the
texture via an imitation of a transformed 1A3. The contrapuntal line in the bassoons
(m.59) share obvious characteristics with later counterpoints to the Subsidiary Theme.164In
addition, the horn motives of m.62 ff (marked 'x' on the next page ) share characteristics with
1A3 and Theme 2 (flute solo, mm.150-3).
Ex.3 4 Thematic counterpoint (beginning of transition to Theme 1)
164
The bassoon statement (particularly during mm.59-62:1) has inherited its linear traits from Motive 1A3 and
the hybrid motive, yet above all the metric outline foretells characteristics of the subsidiary theme and some of
its counterpoints, which we will return to later.
136
These measures lead into a stretto consisting of semi-thematic counterpoint in contrary

motion (mm. 66-68, still over a dominant pedal), a passage which is reminiscent of a
characteristic orchestral section right before the cadenza in the just recently finished First
Piano Concerto. D. Brown points to another connection between the two works, referring
to an Artt contour165 in the Introductory Theme and a Tchaikovsky contour in the
Subsidiary Theme, a connection we shall return to within short.
The main area is composed as a quite extensive ternary outline, with a modulatory middle
section between mm. 95-126. This paragraph is constructed on reorganized characteristic
elements from the A-section. The complementing semiquaver figuration (Ex.3 5) is
perhaps the most characteristic feature of this middle part. Later in the exposition these
figurations also interact in the construction of the codetta.
Possibly the composer felt he had stayed contrapuntally restrained long enough, and that it
was time to let thematic elements be worked out contrapuntally already at this early phase
of the exposition. It has previously been observed that it is a highly characteristic feature
with Tchaikovskys orchestral style that distinct, substantial motives interact in
contrapuntal textures in the exposition, in which the melody itself is just taking part on
equal terms with thematically derived layers. The horn-melody from m.95 is constructed
from 1A, which in turn is derived from the introduction. The falling fifth lies embedded in
both themes: In fact; falling, singled-out intervals recur in this movement, as seen later,
possibly stemming from the troubled, diminished fourth, which is the movement's opening
interval.
165
137
Ex.3 5 Thematic counterpoint (Score extract of the first part of the themes middle section)
The motive later to be associated with the closing theme (Ex.3 13); the Mozartean 1B
(Symphony No.39:IV) , appears in the upper strings, continue to accompany motives
associated with the introduction. For a moment, the basses hold an f#-pedal, the tonics
relative minor, below this three-layer thematic counterpoint, containing 1B, Intro D and a
permuted Intro B:
Ex.3 6 Thematic counterpoint
Then follows a modulatory sequence (Ex.3 7), constructed from 1A2 in the treble
instruments, this time displaying the motive close to its original form in ascending
sequence. The contrapuntal bass-line might be read as Intro D in descending sequence,
particularly viewed in light of how this material develops after m.119, alternatively the
line might be read as an inverted1A3. The four-crotchet motive may look just as much
like a mathematical brain-game as music for the sake of art, but it nevertheless
138
demonstrates a sober and unromantic compositional attitude which is a familiar feature

with the person we by now associate with Tchaikovsky of the early symphonies. From the
anacrusis of m.119 the already mentioned falling leap; Intro A1/1A2a, is counterpointed
in augmented forms as major sixths, perfect fifths and diminished fifths against a
descending Intro D. The repeated minor seconds in the bass at the end of this passage,
together with the upbeat before m.215, points to Intro D as contrapuntal source equally
much as a permutation of 1A2; in either case the counterpoint is thematic.
Ex.3 7 Thematic counterpoint (Tutti; harmonic material excluded)
This continuous motivic contraction might heighten a perilous sense of monotony (mm.
119-22). The continuously evolving short cells, involving quavers in renewed constellation,
accelerates the transition toward the restatement of the theme. Thus the increasing danger of
cunning pedantry draws still closer, while others might claim that this transition stands as a
clear manifestation of a neue sachlichkeit and strict consequence. If not necessarily less
romantic than his contemporary colleagues, Tchaikovsky is at least the complete opposite of
the inescapable romantic he is sometimes accused of being.
The stretto leads to the restatement of the themes A-part, which ends with 1A1-signals in the
trumpets, functioning as a new transition toward the Subsidiary Theme. Tchaikovsky chooses
to keep this signal intact in the strings in the ritardando, instead of infusing it with the
succeeding accompaniment-figuration appearing in the thematic statement (ref. Ex.3 10).
139
The Theme itself forms what Brown, in his constant search for anagrams, defines as the
Tchaikovsky contour166, a contour found also in the opening of the just recently finished
First Piano Concerto.167 The pitches of this motive are repeated twice during different phrase
lengths before the theme moves on. Since some sub-motives here are interrelated, marking
them feels slightly out of place, and particularly derived 2A2 versions recur later only
recognized by their motivic contour.
Ex.3 9 Subsidiary Theme; '2A', the first theme of the Second Area, originating from Intro C
Tchaikovsky then immediately employs his habit of developing his new theme contrapuntally
already at the themes restatement by means of continuously changing motivic combinations:
But now Tchaikovsky suddenly found himself developing his material in its wrong place
again, and led the passage into contemplative dwelling on a motive from the main and the
introductory themes (mm.158-61). Yet in doing so he could just as well let himself go by
166
David Brown: Tchaikovsky. The Crisis Years, 1874-1878. (W. W. Norton & Co. Inc. 1983) p. 44.
N. Rubinsteins first negative reaction to the concerto is well known. In spite of the works rapidly growing
fame, much due to Hans von Blows successful introduction of the work in America and Europe (together with
Siloti), Rubinstein was just one of many who did not realize the thematic coherence within the work. When
Tchaikovsky composed his Piano Trio in memoriam of Rubinsteins death approximately seven years later, the
composer makes a touching gesture by elegantly reinserting, as a transformation of the Trios main theme, this
Tchaikovsky contour from the Concerto (originally dedicated to Rubinstein) and work out the original motive
in the Trios first movement, from eight measures after the return of Listesso tempo.
167
140
reworking the Subsidiary theme (2A) drastically, in a way that transforms it into a new, short
theme (2B; alternatively the B-section of a binary form, see Ex.3 11). The new theme is
eventually at the height of blooming in the recapitulation. Both in the first and second
statements the theme is presented within a poly-linear framework. In other words, the initial
statement (2B1) has a transitory function when departing from 2A; the second (2B2) recurs in
the recapitulation, where it is formed as a bold, self-sufficient fanfare-like utterance. This
procedure may probably explain why 2B is practically absent in the actual development,
although several threads may be tied from the latter back to the introduction. Spelling the first
two measures of the first violins backward discloses a rather corresponding zigzag contour to
Intro B. Although such an interpretation might seem somewhat contrived, the three tones
ending the phrase, at least (mm.164-5), equals the opening of the symphony; the "Artt
contour", which is counterpointed in the bass register in m.165.
Ex.3 11 Thematic counterpoint, Second part of the Second Area (2B), initial statement (2B1)
A typical Tchaikovskyan textural transfer takes place from m.170; the staccato eighth-note
figurations in the upper woodwinds drizzle downward, forming an eighth-note staccato
bassoon pedal on e (m.174, preparing the new dance-like theme) beneath a further
refreshingly new transitory shading of the first theme of the Second Area (Ex.3 12). The
dance atmosphere is more withheld than for example a corresponding dance-like variant
appearing in the opera Mazepa168, something that should be expected of a theme occurring in
a sonata movement.
Ex.3 12 Thematic transformation from the Second to the Third Area
168
The opera was composed during 1881-83, and had its premiere in 1884.
141
The first measure of the transition is unmistakably familiar, yet combining elements from the
second and the forthcoming closing theme makes the transformation complete; a Russian,
Gopak-sounding transformation of the Second Theme breaks through (Ex.3 13). In this text
the stretch before m.198 has been regarded as transitory, based on its motivic content. A. P.
Brown views it as the first Closing theme, without transition, which is a viable alternative,
particularly in respect of key169. The melodic elements constituting 3A have already been
thoroughly prepared in advance of its statement. They are represented by the theme's own Aelements suggested in the previous transition together with hints of 1B, presented already in
the main theme, yet at the same time standing completely integrated in the new theme proper
(see also Ex.3 5 & 6):
Ex.3 13 Closing Theme (3A)
The dance-rhythm in its pure form, initially established by the bassoon in the previous
transition (m. 174ff), succeeds the above statement, fashioned as an orchestral gopak
(mm.206-7, 210-11), possibly alluding to the effect of an accordion. From m.208 ff there is a
brief textural decomposition of this harmonic and rhythmically static dance-rhythm,
juxtaposing the dance rhythm and 3A cells in imitation.
A shading of the closing theme announces the opening the development most effectively ff at
m.214, but surprisingly stops on the first chord, an effect later used in the Violin Concerto,
where a single tutti chord is all the listener is left with as a substitute for a possible
restatement of the haunting main theme. Thereafter the main theme's opening gestalt starts
forming sectional imitations (Ex.3 14). The bass layer is particularly worthy of note, gliding
seamlessly from 3A into an inverted 1A3 in a chromatically flavored descent. The rather fanshaped imitative construction has, this far, often been observed as a highly Tchaikovskyan
characteristic: This type of thematically based abrupt fugal expositions are most probably
found more often in his three early symphonies than in corresponding works by any other
composer of the mid- or late-romantic period.
169
A. P ETER B ROWN: The Symphonic Repertoire Volume III Part B (Indiana University Press, Bloomington
2008) p.355
142
Another frequently used procedure in his earlier symphonies follows immediately after the
transposed restatement of this modulatory passage; interplay between Theme 1 and 2
elements, forming a new modulatory passage. As seen on previous occasions the management
of this procedure is clear-cut, making each thematic layer stand forth very distinctly in the
polyphonic web. Yet unlike what has been the case with the majority of similar constructions
of the composer's symphonic career, the contrapuntal layers are supported by rhythmic, less
thematic material.
143
In this example the 2.nd violin in measure 228 particularly carries traits from the first
statement of the Second Groups Second Theme (later transformed in the recapitulation). But
elements from that themes first presentation are possibly lurking behind the scenes (see the
string parts of Ex.3 11).
Except for the difference of tempo, the motivic utilization which follows brings into mind a
thematic statement in the Manfred Symphony several years later; both incidents being in the
minor mode,170 the home key of Manfred being the Third Symphonys relative minor (this
episode is in Manfred's raised submediant). But the contextual implications are very different
in this formal, almost impersonal poly-linear passage of the third symphony from that of the
momentous thematic statement in Manfred.
The close imitation of elements belonging to the main theme, resulting melodically mostly in
scale progressions, might well be one of the most formalistic passages of music Tchaikovsky
ever wrote (Ex.3 16, see also comment on the First Suite/Ex.3 17). The section modulates
from g# minor to f# minor, which is also the key of the corresponding Manfred example in the
f# Dorian. Except for a short modulation to g-minor, the last passages spanning over twelve
measures are now modulating seamlessly. Worthy of note is also the elegant, stylized bass, a
feature we by now expect to find with this type of clean contrapuntal Tchaikovsky passages.
Ex.3 16 Thematic counterpoint (the woodwind doublings are omitted)
170
Tchaikovsky: Manfred Symphony, first movement, m.14 ff.
144
One cannot help but noticing the very strong common characteristics with these strettos and
similar passages in the grand fugue of the First Suite. In the symphony there has been a
continuing melodic augmentation of the opening interval of 1A2, from the fifth to the minor
seventh. The opening motive of the suites fugue theme also continues expanding from its
opening fifth during that movement. At mm. six and seven after E the interval is a minor
seventh, and in the melodically and texturally strikingly equal stretto at mm. 4-1 before G it is
a perfect octave.
Ex.3 17 Thematic stretto from the first movement of the First Suite (Compare with Ex.3 18)
The immanent 5/4-meter of the Suite contributes to a less conventional solution than that of
the symphony. But with a total of seven entries the fugato of the symphony at least ousts the
suite in that respect. The effect of Ex.3 16 may seem somewhat trivial and predictable, the
opening falling seventh notwithstanding. Without bringing in new elements or in any
substantial way changing the proportions of the previous passage, it leads directly into a
stretto (Ex.3 18), followed by yet another re-texturization of this outline from m.255.
Ex.3 18 Thematic counterpoint (1A/Intro A elements)
In the ensuing paragraph the Main Themes second motive is substituted by a variant of the
145
opening motive of same, contrapuntally worked out together with its metrically augmented
form, yet otherwise quite close to the original. These elements are connected by a reworked
and prolonged introductory motive; 'Intro B', in the ensuing modulatory dominant chain:
Tchaikovsky manages to further intensify this construction by increasing the number of

independent layers, starting with a three-part close imitation of an augmented, permuted main
theme, accompanied by another variant of same, where the variation itself reveals the subtle
connection between the introduction, above all Intro B, and the main theme:
Ex.3 20 Thematic counterpoint171
171
This 1A2-variant might possibly bring into mind melodic elements of the introductory theme of the Second
Symphony, a work written approximately two years earlier and substantially revised about four years after the
premiere of the Third Symphony. We encounter a somewhat similar, intensified contrapuntal solution early in
the development of No.2 I.
146
Then follows a transposed version of the previous approximately fifteen measures and the
further destiny of this variation as with the former is to end up as a stretto.
The section preceding this stretto has been harmonically tied together over the local Tonic
pedal on A, via expected as well as less expected progressions for every second measure:
Dominant Tonic Subdominant Supertonic and Relative Tonic, followed by a brusque
modulation in m. 284 to its flattened supertonic in the minor (the flattened sub-mediant of the
home key). Standard modulations on the circle of fifths continue, while the bass once again
takes an active melodic role. In Ex.3 21 Tchaikovsky pushes his imitative 1A2-solution still
further, now with the upper woodwinds and horns entering rhythmically diminished vis--vis
the original note values in the strings:
This dominant-chain continues, but the stretto accelerates, both in respect of motivic
development and harmonic tempo, something that calls for renewed instrumentation. In Ex.3
22 the 1A2-motive, by now rhythmically double diminished to sixteenth-notes, has become a
self-evident springboard toward 3B. As the recapitulation draws near the movement takes
more and more the form of a formal experiment: Except for the lowest horns, all elements are
thematically straight motives or derived versions (mm.289-92):
147
The Main Theme in its original key is followed by the First Theme of the Second Area, now
in the flattened supertonic. The reason for classifying 2B as a theme in its own right is on the
basis of what now happens; 2B (Ex.3 23, see also Ex.3 11) reorganizes itself by bringing in
elements from the main theme and simultaneously restructuring the Intro D-cells from its
second measure. As was also the case with its first statement, this one is exposed polylinearly, both in its transitory and proper statements. The imitative aspect contributes in
underscoring this modulatory version as Theme 2B2 proper, modulating toward its full-blown
and triumphant statement at m.378. But it is also worth mentioning that 1A's four opening
pitches are embedded in the new version of the theme.
Ex.3 23 Thematic counterpoint (Second Groups Second Theme 2B2; transitory phase)
148
The above transitory passage, first modulating, subsequently returning to Bb, moves toward
the full-blown trumpet & trombone-version of the theme (Ex.3 24). The new thematic
statement approximates a poly-linear construction in the finale of the Fourth Symphony, just
before the final return of the motto in that work. The technique as such is strikingly similar:
one brass layer imitates the other, and the strings build up to a vibrant, thematically inspired
layer, the latter quality, though, more easily recognizable in the finale of the Fourth.
It is not totally unlikely that the frantic motivic texturing in the strings from m.378 (Ex.3 24),
with its characteristic twist; the low note of the falling sixth in fact being the chords seventh,
still resounds from the Finale of the Second Symphony. In No.2 this layer is usually traduced
by the brass, bassoons or basses as a counterpoint to the theme played by the remaining
orchestra (see Second Symphony, Finale, ex. m. 449 ff.). However, the melodic origin of the
present layer in No.3 I is the opening melodic interval of the work; now in the guise of a
diminished fourth. This falling interval has until now stood out in various augmented forms:
from the start being notably emphasized on its way toward the main theme, where the falling
perfect fifth was predominating. The interval keeps expanding above all in the development
to become a minor seventh, and in the statement of the above theme the predominant
interval is heard as a major sixth.
This attempted reading of the string-layer as an augmentation of the symphony's opening
interval (also responsible for downward fifth of the main theme) may appear contrived - a
suspicion not completely inappropriate. Yet the continuous repeat of this leap in the
accompanying strings singles it out and adds weight to it, and the sixth has most probably
been chosen out of the need of optimal formal counterpoint between the three most substantial
layers in the texture; the string layer and the two wind layers. Equally notable is the behavior
of the upper strings during the twenty measure long modulatory variation right in advance:
there is a general ascent in these three upper voices, containing thematic gestures only,
subsequently leading to their new role / new layer at m.378.
Ex.3 24 Thematic counterpoint (Score extract; without supporting parts & Bb pedal)
149
Interaction between thematically based ascending and descending lines constitute the brilliant,
stately and harmonically restless coda (Ex.3 25), where, at times, only glimpses of thematic
material may be detected. It is always present, though, for example at the beginning of the
coda, possibly associated with an augmented 1A3, where in fact the themes opening melodic
range is compressed in order to construct a fundamental stepwise line. Thus the original main
theme's first - third - fourth degree-combination is leveled out linearly to first - second - third
etc, yet revealing its origin by the upward leap to the second (ninth) scale degree on the fifth
note.
Ex.3 25 Thematic counterpoint (Full orchestra, outer voices)
1A and 1B materials continue to level out their respective characteristics, ending up as linear,
stylized gestalts, sacrificing their individual personalities for the common good, resulting in
exemplary textural clarity (Ex.3 26). The upper strings transform into new fundamental roles
via ascending textural transfer (mm. 457-9). The upward surge in m.456 and 458 ff closes as
barely recognizable vestiges of Intro B - a variation which had begun in the bass-layer at the
opening of this coda (see also Ex.3 25).
Ex.3 26 Semi-thematic counterpoint & textural transfer
150
Since the middle movements do not follow sonata-formulas, one might suspect that they are
to a lesser degree treated to thematic counterpoint than the outer. In the case of the Third
Symphony, one has to reconsider: although not all the thematic counterpoints are equally
spectacular, they are so numerous that some are just mentioned without being exemplified.
The second movement, Alla tedesca, is a study in thin, easy-flowing textures. It is shaped as a
ternary form with a central trio; this trio later affects the finale, and even serves as
accompaniment of the recurring opening theme. Tchaikovsky at times masks his thematic
connections, but if vague connections like the contours rendered in Ex.3 27a are intended - or
just are consequences of the general organic, creative process - remains unknown.
Ex.3 27a Thematic inter-movement connection
The melody as such, which is in itself a ternary form, is played by the first flute and clarinet in
unison, which, after eight measures, is counterpointed by the first bassoon (Ex.3 27b). Intro A
might be camouflaged in the first stretch of this counterpoint, a view particularly justified by
the falling diminished fourth. After about 8 measures it presents a slight variation of the
melody, played in close imitation to it:
Ex.3 27b Thematic counterpoint
(score excerpt; without harmonic support / waltz pattern in the strings)
The theme's B-part is counterpointed by 1A figurations. One of Tchaikovsky's trademarks is

his ability of projecting each substantial layer effortlessly within the texture. This moment
may possibly serve as an exception, though most conductors compensate for the dynamics
151
suggested by the composer. Yet one also suspects that Tchaikovsky wanted the counterpoint
to be more sensed than projected.
Ex.3 27c Thematic counterpoint (only thematic layers are rendered)
The melody's continuation is then accompanied by an ascending, local counterpoint by way of

changing sound-color (mm.47-58). In advance of 1A's return, the last melodic cell of the
theme's middle section puts an imprint on the counterpoint to 1A from m.62ff.
It is almost impossible to avoid that the Intro D motive will recur in one way or another
during the work, but in this movement there is at least one particular occasion where its
appearance can hardly be seen as purely accidental (Ex.3 28). The quarter-note motive excels
by way of a hemiola within a 3/2-signature (by a 2/4 subdivision) together with the remaining
harmonically supportive accompaniment (excluded in the example), while the melody sticks
to its rhythm, subsequently persuaded into 2/2.
Ex.3 28 Thematic counterpoint and inter-movement connection
Neither do the flickering triplets that move around the orchestra during the entire Trio (mm.
83-153), moving poly-linearly alongside the movements main theme (mm. 154-61) appear to
be just a random solution172. This idea too was conceived in the introduction as a vital
thematic germ (ref. Ex.3 2, mm.10-11). It may be seen as a combination of the figurations of
the first movement's mm. 10 and 12 ff. and the staccato phrasing of m.11. In fact, the triplets
172
The second scherzo (i.e. main portions of the fourth movement) possesses much of that same thinned-out,
transparent texture, yet it is more focused as regards number of constructive elements. Threads can later even be
drawn from the finale's second episode back to the fluttering triplets in the middle section of the second
movement.
152
with their constantly moving melodic seconds recur in various guises in all the
movements, except for the fourth; the latter will produce light and telling motion by
alternative means. The flying triplet-figurations contribute to the works light, easy-going
impression, and mostly, though not constantly, reside in the treble registers.
These Intro 1B1-triplets may interact in poly-linear passages, as is the case from m. 107ff,
together with a retrograde contour of another motive from the symphonys introduction; Intro
B (alternatively from the second note of its original contour).
Ex.3 29 Thematic/textural counterpoint and inter-movement connection (Horns omitted)
From the opening paragraph of the ternary-structured Trio (recurring at 137, Ex.3 30) a
variation of another introductory motive (Intro E) in the violas is set against compounded
woodwind triplets and duplets. As regards the wriggling behavior of the triplet cells combined
with their exquisite sense of direction, this texture brings into mind the third movement of the
Sixth Symphony.
Ex.3 30 Thematic/textural counterpoint and inter-movement connection (Cellos & basses omitted)
The triplets then continue to counterpoint the recurring Alla Tedesca from m.154.
Except for the movement's opening theme, the remaining material ranks among the least
contoured among Tchaikovsky's thematic arsenal.
153
Another contrapuntal employment of the above technique will soon be reinforced by the
introductory thematic flute- and bassoon-statements of the next movement.
2.3.3 Symphony No.3, Movement III
The opening of the third movement brings back that subdued atmosphere from the
introduction of the first. This assertion is valid both with regard to the melodic elements and
even more by the peculiar way pauses are used in order to segregate these elements, which are
longer than just ordinary phrase delimitations. The concluding sixteenth note at the close of
each phrase supports this assumption:
Ex.3 31a Inter-movement connections; phrasing
This soft woodwind coloring of the third movements opening, without oboes and with the
flutes kept in their lower register, was also used effectively in the introduction to the finale of
the first symphony, where the bassoons and second clarinet provided the constructional
forward thrust. The textural/thematic linear 1C-factor from the opening of No.3 III (Ex.3
31b), characterized by its stepwise linear and turning quarter-note motives, serves as
counterpoint also for major parts of the Second Theme, and, its inconspicuousness
notwithstanding, later rounds off the movement's central section as a thematic force in its own
right. It is read as a 2B permutation from m.46ff.
There are further similarities with the third symphonys first and third movements, like the
154
first movements 2A-Themes possible influence upon the middle section of the slow
movement, though this might be coincidental:
Ex.3 32 Thematic/motivic connections between the first and the third movements
A very subordinate connection may even be drawn to the finales 1B-motive (Ex.3 38), but by
doing so one might run the risk of transgressing the borders of fruitful speculation.
After a bassoon solo at m.8ff (1B, constructed from elements of 1A), the movement's first
measure makes service as a repeated signal, accompanied by a counterpoint built on the
theme's opening; particularly mm.3-4, together with upwardly striving 1C material at m.17ff.
Exemplarily shaped 1C-layers accompany the statement of the opening phrase of the Second
Theme (2A) from 35 ff. It is probably correct to label this type of counterpoint as thematic,
not only in respect of being further developed through the ensuing textures, but even more so
because it plays the main role in a passage through which it counterpoints itself (m.68ff).
After 2A the theme proper continues by having even more elegant counterpoints written to it
in the bass. The phrasing of the middle strings at mm.46-48 and 50-51 brings to mind an
analogue hemiola passage in the second movement (ref. Ex.3 28), thus reminding one of the
work's Intro D cell:
Ex.3 33a Thematic counterpoints
The climax of this movement is reached at m.60, at the end of an imitative thematic statement
(Ex.3 33b). This imitation is further supplied with a new permutation of 2B; while the halfcadencing at m.58 underscores Intro D even more than in the corresponding mm.50-51, and
even puts an imprint on the additional hemiola counterpoints from m.60 in the second violins
and violas.
155
Ex.3 33b Thematic counterpoints (doublings in the winds are omitted)
The ensuing manifestation of 1C (Ex.3 33c) might also be associated with thematic material
from both former movements, particularly II 1B. The stylized 2B-element serves as the
beginning of a calm retransition back to Theme 1, infused with frequent accentuated hemiolas
above a pedal on b flat, underscoring an obvious connection with Intro D.
Ex.3 33c Thematic counterpoints (horn doublings are omitted)
The triplets of Theme 1B serve as retransition toward a reshuffled recapitulation accompanied

by 2B'/Intro C-influenced harmonization. The triplet elements, originally deriving from the
introduction of the first movement, further cultivated in the second, thereafter partly
responsible for the present movement's bassoon theme (1B) complement the Second Area's
languishing violin theme over twenty-eight measures, growing into a haunting, passionate and
powerful passage, involving also the stylized augmentation of the present movement's 2B.
Thus all thematic material in this texture originates from previous movements. In advance of
this texture (Ex.3 33d), Tchaikovsky had thoroughly prepared the triplet layer, emphasizing
its clearly thematic 1B-relation.
156
Ex.3 33d Thematic counterpoint
(Doublings and supporting layers are excluded)

The fourth movement is above all a study in thinned orchestral texture, more so than exercise
in melodic and contrapuntal art. The textures are created with consequence and concentration.
Textural support is to some degree realized in the scherzo proper by involving the Intro D cell
(from m.21). Yet even though this involvement is not carried out quite as convincingly as in
earlier movements, there are some notable peculiarities concerning the string accompaniment
below the rushing sixteenth-note figurations from m.21: The majority of melodic intervals
come in the form of seconds; seconds via half-notes are not slurred and quarter-notes are
slurred when they occur as seconds. An interval other than melodic second is tied together
with a melodic second. This might altogether sound a bit contrived, but except for the pedal
the melodic second is the most predominant interval of this quite extensive texture. Even so,
as was the case with parts of the previous middle movements, the counterpoints are not
striking, wanting in thematic as well as contoured melodic originality.
The flickering gestalts of this scherzo might perhaps distract the listener from not recognizing
the fine threads spun between this and the first movement.
First coming into mind is the connection between the Introductory theme's Intro D and E
motives and the trio of the forth movement: they share the same motivic contour, and the trio
relies probably more on the Intro D cell as a thematic force than what has been the case with
any of the previous movements.
Ex.3 34 Thematic/motivic connection between the first and the fourth movements
157
This is the most typical Tchaikovsky scherzo of the two in this symphony, the former
functioning as a partly lyrical intermezzo, with a central scherzo-like trio. The present leans
much more in the direction of texturally founded dry wit. It is above all highly focused in
most respects; melodically, texturally and rhythmically. Harmonically it is substantially more
thinned out than the scherzo of, for example, the second symphony. The square, bombastic
trombone tune (mm. 109-24) used as a local counterpoint to the movements semiquaver
spinning-wheel theme above a pedal on e shows a sarcastic irony we should later expect to
find with Shostakovich (Ex.3 35a). The heavy beats of the trombone-counterpoint (mm.10914) are close to forming an inverted version of the Intro B - counterpoint of the previous
scherzo (see Ex.3 29).
Ex.3 35a Local (hypothetically thematic) counterpoint (supporting voices are omitted)
From m. 37 the sixteenth-note figuration, presented as a contrasted string-woodwind

combination, encounter the recurring fragmented introductory Intro A1-notes of the
symphony:
Ex.3 35b Thematic counterpoint and inter-movement connection
1A also transforms to another contour between m.45-61, 69-88 etc., yet still keeping its
spinning-wheel effect, serving as a counterpoint to a woodwind figuration, which might be
derived from the work's stepwise falling Intro D cell, both in its augmented form in the strings
and diminished form in the woodwinds. While the cell's phrasing characteristics are absent,
thus impairing such an allusion, the combination of one joyously staccato, diminished
158
woodwind edition and a ditto augmented sinister cello-version makes a thematic connection
plausible, although with considerable doubt.
Mm. 37-40 in the horn show immediate relationship with the first notes of the works Intro A,
and above all, a cross-relation with Intro C seems plausible, particularly when keeping in
mind that this kind of melodic zigzag pattern is far from characteristic of Tchaikovsky:
Ex.3 36 Thematic/motivic connection between the first and the fourth movements
In the recapitulation the counterpoint in the flutes can be read as deriving from the
introductory octave leaps in the strings (easiest explained graphically; see Ex.3 37), or/and as
to be absorbing the contour of the scherzo-themes introductory cell, amalgamated with a
melodic elaboration of the First theme from the second movement (II; mm. 19-20). In sum IV:
mm.164-67 thus is an augmented contour of the movement's scherzo-theme; 1A:
Ex.3 37 Thematic counterpoint and inter-movement connection
M. 398ff displays a half-complementary touch of thematic counterpoint.

This movement is said to be a favorite of Balakirev. It is remarkable for its forward drive and
subtle orchestration. Discreet orchestral aloofness may thus have been partly responsible for
the composer's inferior use of counterpoint, and some listeners might have wished for more
contrapuntal projection into the somewhat repetitive Trio.
2.3.5 Symphony No.3, movement V

The Finale is a rondo with two separate and two integrated, thematically reworked episodes;
each in a sense derived from the rondo theme itself, by their ascending fundamental lines and
159
by the descending, mainly chromatic complementing bass. The second episode is a variation
of the first, the third is a fugue, whereas the fourth is a further adaptation and intensification
of the first; an apotheosis before the concluding coda. The theme itself opens the movement
without any preliminary ado:
Ex.3 38 Rondo Theme (opening) / (Semi-) thematic counterpoint, thematic from m.9
Not unexpectedly Tchaikovsky starts his contrapuntal preparation already at the themes
initial statement. The chromatically oriented bass-line moving in contrary motion to this
festive polonaise is at the time of its presentation "just" an elegant, local line. But it prepares
at the same time the ground for the Episodic Material (E.M.); consisting of linear gestalts
which are not derived directly from the surface of the rondo theme proper.173 Notice also the
immanent hemiolas in mm.3-4 of this line, a tendency present earlier in the symphony.
Later the 1B-motive usually comes into use in the shape of a descent made up by stepwise
quarter-notes, alternatively seen as inversions. Obviously, this is a very standard and
elementary turn, but it is used with such extreme consequence in this movement, that it feels
appropriate to stress its constructional weight. The same argument goes for the three cells
within 1A. They are the simplest of ingredients, yet utilized in an extraordinarily clean-cut
way throughout the movement; a laudable attribute and in the spirit of the entire work (an
exception made, though, for the slow, contrasted middle movement).
Some common architectonical principles recur in the main themes of the outer movements,
not only in respect of their mutual ascending openings, but also as a result of the marked halts
between the opening of the statements and their respective prolongations. The rhythmical
poignant way by which these melodic phrases round off is also very distinct174:
173
174
These episodic materials rely heavily on melodic stepwise ascents, opening by six to eight notes.
At least one of these common features is to be found in the opening of the middle movement, see Ex.3 31a.
160
Ex.3 39 Thematic connection between movements I and V
Themes from the first, third and fifth movements share a mutual descending motivic
characteristic:
Ex.3 40 Motivic connection between movements I, III and V
The Rondo Theme continues as a semi-imitative construction between the outer registers,
transforming into the linear gestalts, which are so characteristic of the Episodic materials:
Ex.3 41 Rondo theme (continued): Thematic counterpoint (Extract from tutti)
The closing of this elaborate theme constitutes the following rhythmical sub-grouping of the
polonaise; 3/4 - 2/4 (- 1/4) with an emphasized, condensed final close in 3/8. Excessive use of
hemiola is later to be found particularly in the coda.
Ex.3 42 Rhythmic acceleration at the close of the rondo theme
Tchaikovsky immediately starts a contrapuntal development based on this theme (Ex.3 43a).
Obviously one might label the 2 E.M.-incidents as semi-thematic, yet the opening gestalts of
the episodic materials are so linear that reducing the thematic importance of these lines seem
161
inappropriate. The viola part is formed by inverted episodic material and the horns signal the
work's ever-present Intro 1A2 rhythm. The remaining layers open with the characteristic
V:1A motive and continue into a turning E.M. - inspired x cell, a process that will continue
into a later texture (see also Ex.3 43c). The development of this cell, as seen in mm.38-39 and
50ff brings immediately into mind the work's three opening notes. The bass-layer, though,
moves directly into a 2(E.M.) inversion. Ex.3 43a is the first of three modulatory
constructions in this extensive and elaborate transition toward the first episode:
Ex.3 43a Thematic counterpoint
After completing a transposed version of this construction, the composer reshuffles some of
the above elements in the second, brief transitory passage (Ex.3 43b, m.m.46-49). In addition
to the expanding, turning x-cell, the y-cell places more weight on the ensuing construction
(m.50ff); although formally reasonable, the technical challenge per se is bearable:
162
Based mainly upon the y-cell the transition glides into a more relaxed state as it draws closer
toward the first episode in the dominant.
The first episode has three notable layers, as demonstrated in the below example.
Tchaikovsky had previously made revisions of his two earlier symphonies, but not of the
Third, and one might possibly have wished for a revision of this somewhat nave thematic
variation. It opens as an ascent in accordance with the outline of the ascending Rondo Theme,
stylized as Episodic material, hence standing out as distinctly independent. The descending
conjunct bass brings immediately into mind the movement's opening construction. But there
is more to it, which slightly strengthens the contrapuntal tendency: A third layer, the triplet
accompaniment in the upper strings, associated with constructive elements from the first three
movements, although the present plain arpeggiato usage reduces its thematic and contrapuntal
weight. The impression of a "dreary tune"175 might have been reduced considerably had some
performances paid more attention to the counterpoints, something which might give the
thematic material needed resistance.
Ex.3 44 Opening of Episode I; Thematic counterpoint (score extract)
A subtle rhythmic restructuring of the opening measures of this first episode, combined with
elements from the triplet figurations of its accompaniment, form the second episode (Ex.3
45). Thin threads may even possibly connect it with the bassoon statement of the third
movement (third movement, m. 9 ff).
Ex.3 45 Episode II
175
163
The eighth-note triplets get the upper hand, and one gradually senses some resemblance with
the trio of the second movement (mm. 120-53). Not only is the poly-linear connection
between the primary thematic imitations strikingly similar, so, in part, is the pizzicato pedal in
the lower strings (see also Ex.3 29):
Ex.3 46 Episode 2: Thematic counterpoint and inter-movement textural connection
This episode transforms gradually into a state similar to the trio of the second movement. One
notices Tchaikovskys customary eye to effective, timbral contrast, while pizzicato duplets
ensure the rhythmic verve (see also Ex.3 30). At m.139ff (Ex.3 47) the slight hemiola shading
between the strings and woodwinds is overshadowed by the timbral contrast / contrary motion
between these instrument groups. This is a kind of textural, chamber-orchestral dialectics
reminiscent of Tchaikovsky's middle movements, not only in this symphony but also in No.2
and in particular No.1.
Ex.3 47 Inter-movement connection & timbral contrast
164
The triplet - duplet layer-combinations recur in all the movements, except for the fourth,
mostly forming architectonically well-shaped, extensive, spun-out passages. Constructed
chiefly by means of staccato neighboring tones they create a shimmering texturization,
starting already in the opening Marcia funebre, where the slurred (yet melodically familiar)
triplets, played moderato, made a somewhat dimmer impression (ref. Ex.3 2).
The recurrence of the rondo theme prepares the ground for a grand fugue, which, if not
viewed as an episode might be viewed as a variation of the rondo theme, particular on the
basis of appearing in the tonic. The previous episodes have been in the dominant key and the
tonics relative minor. The fugue theme is constructed mainly from elements of the rondo
theme, spun out over four measures; the first counterpoint impatiently starts out by reworking
cells from the theme, implementing linear gestalts reminiscent of the episodes.
Ex.3 48 Fugue (Thematic counterpoint from m.181)
The proportion of this fugue is remarkable. It is more than just a pastiche, and so it justifies its
position in the movement just as much as a fugue in a symphony from the classical period or
one from the twentieth century. By varying textures and flexibility of phrasing Tchaikovsky
enables the episode to grow from a baroque embryo to a romantic symphonic expression; a
transition towards the re-entry of the first episode, which in this case becomes a more elevated
and majestic meno mosso statement in the faon of an anthem (Ex.3 49). This is a context
where that somewhat nave, whistling tune at mm. 66-101 is transformed to a pompous yet
noble interlude between the fugue and the coda. The bass-layer is rewritten, yet easily
recognizable - moving for the most part in contrary motion to the episode-theme - and the
insistent triplets/sixteenth-notes in the strings is an effect Tchaikovsky keeps in reserve for the
big occasions. The recurring and varied triplet-usage through this symphony may justify such
usage here:
165
Ex.3 49 (Semi-)thematic counterpoint
Parts of this symphony might be read as an experiment in de-romanticizing the romantic

symphony. Tchaikovsky keeps us at a distance of at least an arm's length in this work. It may
be coincidental or it might have been planned that what might be perceived as a
Tchaikovskyan core is ultimately found in the middle section of the middle movement. But
the Tchaikovsky of utter elegance and wit found in these scherzos is an equally characteristic
trait observable in all his symphonic scherzos, and yet they are all highly individual,
differentiated movements.176
One finds a recurring tendency in Tchaikovsky reception of criticizing him of sometimes
being overtaken by emotions and to forgo discipline. Since this conception does not fit in very
well with this particular work, he is, accordingly, accused of being quite the opposite:
Discipline of expression, thematic concentration, and a good measure of musical intellect are
admirable qualities in a development, but Tchaikovsky's dogged pursuit of what he fondly
imagined was proper developmental technique turns discipline into repression, concentration into
constriction, and lively intellect into arid pedantry.177
In his comprehensive biography David Brown mentions no palpable connection between the
movements in the Third Symphony, describing the work as inconsistent, even a
"patchwork".178This, among other things, raises the question whether there is a possible limit
to the speed by which thematic material should be developed or transformed, and above all, if
there should be a possible limit to which thematic material should be renewed or radicalized.
A closer look at Tchaikovsky's next symphony reveals that commentators have taken this
176
One might possibly exclude the waltz of No.5 from such a hypothetical list, of which 'refined elegance' might
be a slightly better characterization.
177
178
Ibid. p.50
166
problem far too lightly, even though the fourth symphony is an extremely much played and
scrutinized work.
The composers brother Modest refers to two quite contrasting reviews 179 of Cui and Laroche
after the world premiere of the Third, first Cui:
"The public remained cool during the performance of the work, and applauded very
moderately after each movement. At the end, however, the composer was enthusiastically
recalled. This symphony must be taken seriously. The first three movements are the best; the
only charm of the fourth being its sonority, for the musical contents are poor. The fifth
movement, a polonaise, is the weakest. On the whole the new symphony shows talent, but we
have a right to expect more from Tchaikovsky."
Cui failed to give fair credit to innovations of orchestral writing, since the scherzo can
hardly be characterized otherwise than being remarkable for its sonoric and textural
qualities. Whether this kind of negative attitudes had a direct impact on Tchaikovskys
development as a symphonist, is not yet known for certain. What we do know, is that he
did not approach experimental orchestration later in his numbered symphonies (the
sempre pizzicato-movement of the Fourth Symphony was not as such a completely new
invention), yet he tried out new possible solutions in the Waterfall music of Manfred and
also in the suites, especially Jeu de Sons of the Second Suite. Cui seems to miss the point
that Tchaikovskys sonority is immensely more than just plain vertical instrumentation; it
is most often also with a view to the scherzo in question just as much interplay
between constructional polarities.
Laroches conception of the work differs somewhat from Cui:
"The importance and power of the music, the beauty and variety of form, the nobility of
style, originality and rare perfection of technique, all contribute to make this symphony one of
the most remarkable musical works produced during the last ten years. Were it to be played in
any musical centre in Germany, it would raise the name of the Russian musician to a level
with those of the most famous symphonic composers of the day."
Among those representing a refreshingly new view on Tchaikovskys Third Symphony is

Francis Maes. He is not merely critical to earlier general reception of the work, but even
179
Rosa Newmarch: The Life And Letters of Peter Ilich Tchaikovsky by Modest Tchaikovsky (John Lane,
London) p.179
167
points at the high degree of motivic and polyphonic intricacies in the Third
Symphony. 180
Tchaikovskys symphonic style particularly in this work demonstrates that a symphony
may encompass diametrical opposites, an attitude for which Mahler should be praised as well
as criticized. A closer study of Tchaikovskys score reveals that these diverging aspects are
guises stemming from a mutual source, yet in this work he covers up his tracks even more
carefully than usual. The motivic and textural cross-references in this work are remarkable, as
is the high degree of substantial counterpoint.
180
FRANCIS M AES, Geshiedenis van de Russische muziek: Van Kamarinskaja tot Babi Jar (1996), English
translation 2002, UCLA, p.78.
168
2.4 Symphony No.4 in f-minor, op.36

(Composed May 1877- January 1878, first performed February 1878)
Reception at the turn of the millennium

During his respectful study of the first movement of this symphony, Francis Maes notes that
The dramaturgy of the first movement of the Fourth Symphony is not based on the
transformations of themes in the German sense. The crux is the rhythmic opposition
between the motto and the first theme. 181
However, this is just half the truth; what characterizes Tchaikovskys Fourth Symphony,
including this movement, is that this rhythmical contrast is for the most part rooted in melodic
material, ensuring substantial passages of thematically based counterpoint, truly an
intensification of motivic work (Dahlhaus). The view held by Maes and Taruskin that there
is a waltzpolonaise dialectic in the movement182, supports the forthcoming findings, but in
this writer's view it does not sufficiently give credit to Tchaikovskys notable contrapuntal
achievement. Yet above all the Fourth Symphony turns out to be a further elaboration,
stylization and clarification of the contrapuntal techniques Tchaikovsky already had used
extensively in his three previous symphonies.
2.4.1 Fourth Symphony, movement I

The main thematic material is found in the introductory motto (Ex.4 I 1). Cells a and b are
particularly much used throughout the movement, above all in the main theme, which is the
dominating theme in the development. As regards c, this element refers just as much to a
general linear principle, and it is also re-found as a culmination of the first statement of the
main theme (mm.48-52) besides of being the embryo of the closing 3b theme. The half-step dfactor (m.4) is, of course, found in almost any musical composition in existence, for example
in the important, inverted a-cell in the main theme, yet in this case we shall later re-find a
quite similar way of deliberately utilizing this cell on the second and third beats in the horns.
Thus we may classify these four (and closely related) elements as substantial or
motivic/thematic.
181
FRANCIS M AES, Geshiedenis van de Russische muziek: Van Kamarinskaja tot Babi Jar 1996, English
translation 2002 (UCLA) p.162
182
R ICHARD T ARUSKIN, On Russian Music , University of California Press 2008, pp.131-2
169
Ex.4 I 1 Introductory Fate motto / basic material (not.: transposed; notated)
Evidently, and as we might expect, most of the cells in the forthcoming main theme (Ex.4 I 2)
are derived from the introduction, directly or in form of inversions or other permutations.
Ex.4 I 2 Main Theme (Initial statement)
In accordance with Tchaikovskys usual procedures in his earlier symphonies, he starts

immediately to develop the main theme (Ex.4 I 3), whereby thematic counterpoint is
immediately brought into play: Elements from the main theme are counterpointed in the
woodwinds and the strings respectively. The ascending half-step in the horns reminiscent of
the introduction recurs in this passage from measure 53 (sensed in the upper strings from
52) to 65 and constitutes the third substantial textural layer in this variation.
In addition to the utilization of thematic counterpoint, stylized, contrary motion is, as so often
before, a powerful textural force. The majority of motives used in the contrapuntal work are
interrelated in these three contrapuntal layers. In all the forthcoming excerpts, the composer
does not yield to repetitive sequential standard types of formulas, like what may, for example,
occasionally be found in his earlier symphonies and quite often in Bruckners and even in
Brahmss symphonic production. Most often the counterpoint even when the music flows
most effortlessly is characterized by a nearly note-per-note relationship, offering variety as
regards motives selected for contrapuntal construction:
170
Ex.4 I 3 Thematic counterpoint (Theme 1) / Textural imprint (horns)
The elements taking part in the poly-linear work are varied continuously via new
combinations of simultaneous motives, yet perpetual motivic imprints make the music
proceed effortlessly. In addition to the contrapuntal work, the composer ensures a longitudinal
structuring and planning of specific voices (See Exx.4 I 12, 15 and 25). Special attention
should also be drawn toward the thematic elements: they do not occur in strict sequential
order, their lengths (phrase structures) and types of construction vary. Sometimes they appear
as gestalts closely related to the actual theme-construction. The combining of varying
quotation lengths within a thematically based contrapuntal passage is exemplified in Ex.4 I 4.
Ex.4 I 4 Thematic/motivic counterpoint (Theme 1)
During this part of the exposition, further aspects to Tchaikovskys style become evident:
Sometimes the variation of a cell is given a new role in a forthcoming texture, for example as
shown in measure 67 (Ex.4 I 5); the cell has an impact upon or puts a direct imprint on a
new textural layer. Tchaikovsky usually, as is also seen in Ex.4 I 5, aims at using this type of
approach with convincing clarity: First the cell, derived from a cell in the main theme, is
played by the woodwinds, thereafter it is caught up by the strings where it reasserts itself,
gaining improved status. Thus having been absorbed in the thematic development, the cell
strengthens its position as a chromatic, inverted stature in the woodwinds again from measure
70. The transfer from one section to another most often, like here, results in an utterly clean
architectonic construction; the woodwind-layer is much more than just a run (a fact
171
underlined also by the withheld Moderato tempo); it is the transformation of a thematic cell,
utilized in a new textural construction. Two measures of the Main Theme now counterpoint
the descending chromatic cell-transformation. An imprint from the theme has produced a
new layer, even continuously new layers, which take part in a constantly developing and
transforming thematic counterpoint.
This cell is traceable directly back to the introductory motto. Typical, though, is the gradual,
organic transformation of such a small element from one textural field to another. The rather
anonymous brass layers in measures 70-3 (Ex.4 I 5) and 82-6 (Ex.4 I 7) are rendered in order
to demonstrate the utmost clean-cut dissonance treatment: Even though focus in this
document is being put on selected aspects of dialectic textural construction, Tchaikovskys
supreme ability in solving potential conflicts between separate layers, ensuring optimal
orchestral clarity and transparency, represents another typical feature of his style.
Ex.4 I 5 Thematic counterpoint and textural imprints; continuous formation of new layers
Worthy of notice is also the contrasting constructional relationship between the two
substantial layers rendered in mm.70-1; the theme in the strings is kept rather unchanged
(before being absorbed by the derived cell from m.72 ff), while the woodwind-counterpoint is
built upon the (more remote) cell-permutation: A stylized element is counterpointed by an
original, melodic element. Similar substantial thematically motivated layers continue to
ensure thematically based counterpoints to fragments of the main theme; observe, for
example, the x-diminutions in measures 72-3 (Ex.4 I 5) which occur in permuted form at
measures 79 and 81 (Ex.4 I 6).
172
Ex.4 I 6 Thematic counterpoint / continued formation of new layers via motivic development
The transformation of motivic layers continues seamlessly, resulting in continually new

textural fields containing thematic counterpoint. Contrary motion between the thematic
elements is gradually enforced, having direct impact on the forming and permutation of
substantial, contrapuntal elements; in other words, the majority of typical/original melodic
cells are permuted in order to form stylized ascending or descending lines. Notice also the
perfect layer-segregation; the scale-movements of the remaining layers do not transgress the
brass-lines.
Ex.4 I 7 Thematic counterpoint (Theme 1)
The subsidiary theme (Ex.4 I 8) is a compound stature consisting of a melodic element in the
first clarinet (2a), supported with motivic echoes in the flutes and first bassoon (2b). Two
complementary ideas in the violas and cellos counterpoint 2b, which contain the most
important material for the forthcoming closing section. The cello-cell in measure 118 displays
3a material which grows in importance until the four statements from m. 121/22 ff (see also
Ex.4 I 9), and the modest triadic gesture in the violas faintly suggests the concluding 3b
statement at m.161. 3a and 3b are used in poly-linear constructions during the exposition, but
the latter makes the greatest contrapuntal impact on the development, mostly counterpointing
Theme I. Although one may with justification claim that the broken 3b triad represents a
173
rather common thematic gesture in symphonic works of the nineteenth century, it is

comparatively rare with Tchaikovsky.183
Ex.4 I 8 Subsidiary and closing material / Thematic counterpoint
In Exx.8 & 9 the counter-directional principle is highly present, yet more important: The
simultaneous statements of two substantial elements are taking place (2 and 3a; 3b is barely
being hinted). The 3b-element is the less characteristic, but the most utilized as a contrapuntal
ingredient in the movement. 3a is isolated from the thematic counterpoint and stylized in its
new key from m.134. But there is absolutely nothing which is thematically new when this
occurs; in measures 122, 125, 128 and 135 this thematic element has been counterpointed to
the Theme 2 elements, and it was, as mentioned previously, even introduced already from
m.118 (cellos) and 120 (violas). When the 3a-element stands forth as an isolated stature at
mm.133-34, the episode is strikingly similar to a texture from the second movement (waltz) of
the Serenade for Strings184, m.21ff: both the textural fabric as such which merely consists of
naked, parallel thirds in the violins and the fundamental melodic interval-connection are
quite identical. Even the ascending up-beat is present in both examples; in the symphony the
up-beat takes its origin from the start of the 2a-element. The concurrent statement of two
simultaneous thematic units is unusual.185
183
Usually Tchaikovsky contrasts Brahms in this respect; the latter builds much of his thematic material in his
second, third and fourth symphonies on broken triads.
184
The String Serenade in C was written in 1880, only approximately two years after the Fourth Symphony.
185
Not all commentators take a definite stand as to which theme area the 3a and b themes belong, a fact being
more than understandable viewed in light of the extreme interplay between the thematic components in this
movement, and if they do, they may come up with various possible solutions. An agreeable alternative is
suggested in ERIC B LOM , Tchaikovsky, Orchestral Works, Oxford University Press, London, 1948, pp.29-30.
174
Ex.4 I 9 Subsidiary and closing material / Thematic counterpoint
The 2b woodwind-figurations are found later in the recapitulation of the second movement,
counterpointing that movements main theme. That statement is only constructed as thematic
counterpoint if we choose to accept that the woodwind-figurations are not just isolated within
the second movement, but are imported from thematic material from the first. Not only are the
figurations quite identical; compound texturing via changing woodwind instrumentation,
periodical leaps between them and irregular, shifting physical direction immediately makes an
impression of being highly thematic.186_187 (See Ex.4 I 10)
186
There is also another direct thematic link between movements I and II: The second theme of the slow
movement is constructed out of the opening of the first movements main theme.
187
Further there is a palpable resemblance with the first two measures of the main theme from the second
movement of the Fourth Symphony and a substantial element from the first movement of the Second Symphony;
see, for example, Symphony No.2, first movement, mm.92 and 99-100): Even though they occur in very
different episodes from both a structural and textural point of view, they are constructed quite similarly, even in
respect of phrasing. (The Fourth Symphony was composed between the first and the second version of the
Second Symphony.)
175
Ex.4 I 10 Textural heritage from movement I (Subsidiary Theme)
Besides being related both to the Main Theme and the 3a-element, the closing 3b-statement,
beginning at measure 161 (Ex.4 I 11), most of all originates directly from the opening motto.
It is introduced in the strings, while the trumpets and trombones first counterpoint it with a
rhythmic cell associated with the Main Theme between mm. 161-4. This counterpoint in the
brass echoes the thematic cell in the strings which dominates the transition (mm.159-60)
leading on to the m.161 statement, communicating the spirit of the opening motto.
One may by now observe that the Motto represents a miniature form of the exposition. The
previous areas find their most characteristic material in mm.3-4 while 3B takes its material
mainly from mm.5-6; first focusing on the characteristic downward triadic cell (Closing
cell) derived from the main beats in m.5, starting on the scales fifth degree (mm.161-64 and
169-72). The latter statement is followed by a combination of the descent in m.6 and echoes
of the syncopated close of the restatement at mm.11-12 (mm.173-76). This syncopated
element is reinforced in the permuted variation of the triadic Closing cell in the winds
between mm.165-68, divided into two successive pairs of harmonic thirds, counterpointing
the rhythmic reminiscences of Theme 1188 in the descending strings.
Ex.4 I 11 (Thematic) transition/textural transfer + Thematic counterpoints
(Turn to the next page)
188
Although all thematic material is derived from the opening motto, the
cell, or Motto a and b cells, are so closely associated with the main theme that they are most often referred to as
Theme I cells, even when they recur as part of 3b. In 3a, the opening motive of Theme 1 (in the woodwinds
from m.135) succeeds the more characteristic 3a material (in the strings from m.133). But then again the main
themes opening quarter-note / eighth-note - combinations may have had an impact upon the mm 134-35
statement in the violins.
176
The ensuing thematic restatement in the horns is counterpointed by the woodwinds and
violins from m.169 (Ex.4 I 12); a counterpoint which is even more closely related to the main
theme, both as a result of its instrumentation and because of the conjunct cell-combinations,
permuted as to give contrary motion to the descending thematic triad. (This Closing-cell later
reinvents itself in a permuted form from m.284 ff in the trombones, and in the Coda at
mm.399-402, just before the augmented, concluding restatement of the main theme.)
Although Theme 3b is not reworked to any notable extent during the development, it is
treated and reworked quite substantially during its presentation.
Taking a glance at the linear voice-structure, the string-part from measure 155 ff.
demonstrates Tchaikovskys long-term planning of a single, predominant orchestral layer
(Ex.4 I 12); the first violin-part is rendered from its transitory function from m.155 to the
return of the motto at 193, formed mainly like a long arch. Firstly, the Theme 1-cell is carried
sequentially upward toward the statement of Theme 3b, subsequently continuing gradually
downward again to m.169, where it counterpoints the restatement of the new theme in the horns in
an upward surge, thereafter continuing still further upwards to a tutti reunion at m.176. There it
engages in a Theme 1 variation from m.177 which has similarities with some thematic references
in the Finale (for example from the finales m. 50). The violin part, in an extremely exemplary
outline, then continues exploring the possibilities of the main theme above a rhythmically
changing orchestral background until the motto returns in the brass.
177
Ex.4 I 12 Voice structure / textural transfer (and Thematic counterpoint, mm.169-74)
Since similar voice-structures might also be found with other composers of the romantic era,
the quotation in Ex.4 I 13 is not as unique and characteristic for Tchaikovsky as is the
composers use of thematic counterpoints. But the smooth transfer between registers, the
equally smooth change of roles (the example encompasses e.g. the thematic counterpoint to
the horns from m.169) are, nonetheless, quite descriptive characteristics of this type of
Tchaikovskyan voice structure189. It has thus a constructional side which most sophistically
carries a dialectic focus; not only is the listener directly confronted with the poly-linear
passages when they actually occur; the persistent voice-continuation might also be regarded
as a goal in itself.
At this point it might be appropriate to stress that the principle of thematic counterpoint must
not be confused with more standard type of dialectic orchestral texturing, where motives are
189
See, for example, also mm. 231-294 in this movement
178
being complemented190 in different orchestral parts. (The question-response method,

utilizing, for example, contrasting instrumentation, is perhaps the most common and ordinary
type of such complementary textures.) The type of procedure which is rendered in the next
example is a borderline case; a rather common type of complementing texture bordering to
thematically based counterpoint. A discourse concerning an episodes possible poly-linear
qualities may time and again lead to the question whether continuing existing layers turn into
standard, non-thematic voice-leading, as soon as a new thematic entrance takes place.
Although such procedures may be expertly executed, they may be of insignificant thematic
importance. The question concerning the originality of a given thematically rooted
counterpoint seems to be a demanding yet extremely interesting subject for future research. In
Ex.4 I 13 each voice, as the result of most elegant part-writing, carries traces of the
concluding descent-motive from the motto, a motive which is found regularly throughout the
movement (see for example mm.5-6, 48-49, 50-52). The reason for including this example in
our discussion is to emphasize that the quality and originality of this type of textures leans
toward a quasi" counterpoint, a procedure which Tchaikovsky usually finds insufficiently
interesting. Even so the complementing structure within which the thematic elements relieve
each other brings a more relaxed momentum to the opening of the development section after
the concluding intensity of the closing 3b-theme. Here the more anonymous subsidiary layers
are just vaguely rooted in thematic material in the form of short stylizations in contrary
motion.
Ex.4 I 13 Motivic complementation, bordering to semi-thematic counterpoint (Theme 1)
In Ex. 4 I 14, the presence of thematic counterpoint is far more significant. As in examples 4 I
3-12 Tchaikovskys thematic counterpoints usually create a forward drive. But in these early
190
Complementation is a term suggesting that two or more thematically founded parts relieve each other by no
overlap or just a minimum of overlap. Accordingly, this approach represents only inferior contrapuntal
importance. The larger the thematic overlap, the more profound the contrapuntal impact.
179
passages of the development section this propulsive effect is reduced by means of periodic
halts in the counterpoints and a general withheld aloofness, moving for the most part in
contrary motion to the thematic development in the woodwinds.
Ex.14 Thematic counterpoint (Theme 1)
In our next example, once again the linear structure of the first violin part is worthy of
comment: During its arch-shaped rise and fall in the development from m.236 to m.294 the
violin-part conveys foregrounds and backgrounds; the thematic material is at times directly
quoted from the main theme, at other occasions developing organically from it. The violin
part is formed as an extremely consistent organism, where much of the accompanying
sections have their roots in thematic material. The outline of this type of layers implies
elegantly connected textures obtained via extremely well planned use of motives and/or
registers. Tchaikovsky rarely falls into excessive use of primitive solutions like arpeggiolayers. Even when the violins are supporting the fate-motto in the trumpets (m.253 ff., 263 ff.,
transposed one semi-tone, 278 ff.), the violin-part is purely thematic.
There are similar examples of linear voice-planning for the first violins in, for example, mm.
334-55 and mm. 373-422 and in the Finale from m.47ff.
Ex.15 First violin-part, measures 236-294; seamless role-changes between textures
180
(Ex.15, continued)
There is always the danger that thematic counterpoint may become mechanical, but
Tchaikovskys thematic counterpoint is extremely versatile. Even at the rather simple
manifestation from m.236 (Ex.4 I 16), he avoids mechanical sequencing, even though the
counterpoint is, to be sure, a modulatory, repetitive creation. The episode grows organically
out of the previous strings-woodwinds dialectic which had put its mark on the episode proper
at mm. 234-6 by forwarding it and leaving its clear imprints on it. This texture owes much of
its existence to the main theme's two-note, stepwise, thematic, falling horn cell:
181
Ex.4 I 16 Thematic counterpoint (Theme 1)
The above modulation leads to a climax at measure 253, containing three thematically
stylized layers. Layer 1: the introductory motto in the trumpets, layers 2 & 3: descending and
ascending (inverted) Theme 1- layers in the upper and lower registers respectively. There is
practically nothing in the score which is not rooted in thematic material (except for the
timpani, which are omitted in the rendering of the score).
In measure 254 the additional trombone-layer leads to a construction with four thematic
layers, adding a thrilling rhythmic counterweight.
Ex.4 I 17 Semi-thematic counterpoints (Theme 1 & Motto)
182
The powerful effect of the climax at m.253 is more due to the clean-cut simultaneous threepart thematic treatment than mere tone-coloristic effects. Rather on the contrary; the coloristic
aspect is almost erased as a result of the temporary doublings of the woodwind and brasslayers.
In order to make a clear argument for the thematic counterpoint in Example 4 I 20, a look
back to, for example, measures 224-6 (Ex.4 I 18) feels appropriate: In mm.225-6 the violinfiguration, established as a transformation of the syncopated accompaniment in mm.224-5, is
a discreet, subtle foreboding of what is going to happen in m.258, absorbing the thematic
development in the cellos and the first bassoon.
Ex.4 I 18 Motivic coherence/development & thematic counterpoint
From measure 259 there is a change of scoring approach as regards instrumentation; contrary
motion between thematic layers are no longer limited to the upper and lower parts
respectively, but is also found between the high and middle strings and woodwinds. The bass
instruments (of both sections) turn towards a markedly more aggressive, bouncing and
contrasting bass-line as the composer pushes the climax even further:
Ex.4 I 19 Thematic counterpoint (see also Ex.4 I 18), inversions from m.259
183
The violin figuration in Ex.4 I 20, which has already been stated in the violins at the return of
the Fate motto, contains parts of the folk song and the main theme191 of the Finale (notes 36). Thus the exact quotation of the string cell in this example is re-found in a poly-linear
episode from that movement's m.146 ff. With Tchaikovsky, such whirling layers in tutti
ff
passages are often created from more than mere haphazard solutions; they tend to be
thematically orientated192, here emphasized by hemiolas. At the same time the violin cell
contains a permuted quotation from the main theme's notes 2-5 of the first movement (i.e.:
both layers utilize the same scale degrees).
The sixteenth-note figuration in the lower strings at mm.282-83, circling around the opening
pitches of the main theme, concludes the retransition and prepares the ground for the
simultaneous restatement of the main theme, and a permutation of the closing Theme 3b. The
permutation is made by inverting the direction of the theme's initial broken chords and adding
the falling "tale", reminiscent of the original theme as well as the motto.
As one is about to renew one's acquaintance with Theme 3b, it should be stressed that the start
of its original statement might be regarded as an expanded form of the string-motive from
Theme 3a, just the way that motive is a stylization of an excerpt from the opening mottos
measures three and four. Driven to its logical conclusion, nearly everything that happens in
191
The Finale's theme 1B.

The Transfer from the development of Symphony No.6 I represents another telling, quite similarly
constructed example (Symphony No.6 I, m.188ff).
192
184
the movement derives from the opening motto, yet the mottos measures 5 & 6 contain the
closest link to Theme 3a.
Ex.4 I 22 Thematic coherence
A restatement of the Motto ends with a lingering over one of its motives (see Ex.4 I 23,
mm.363-4), a motive that shall later make up the basis of the festive main march-theme of the
Finale. This motto-fragment is subsequently augmented in the flutes and clarinets,
counterpointed by a variation of the Main theme in the strings; the latter having much in
common with earlier variations as regards contour and rhythm. This episode serves as an
intermezzo - or rather a calm prelude - to the coda:
The same motive is then further developed in the strings: While being transferred between
mm.381-89 from the middle to the upper registers, it establishes itself as a hemiola
counterpoint against fragments from the opening motto (in the trumpets and horns) from
m.389 (See Ex.4 I 24). From m.392 the texture is supplied with yet another substantial layer;
a chromatically rising bass.
185
Ex.4 I 24 Thematic counterpoint (from m.389)
Even though there is a marked focus on thematic counterpoint in this document, one more
suitable example of Tchaikovskys well-considered layer construction ought to be rendered:
After the above episode has been repeated, the concluding measures from 393 develop toward
a permuted statement of the Closing cell - or 2b melodic third-cell - at m.399. The thematic
cells in the strings climb to the high register of the texture, and hang at mm.399-401 while
the brass play the 3b-permutation, after which the strings continue with a culminating
variation of the main theme (m. 402 ff), rounding off the episodes arched contour.
Ex.4 I 25 (from m.393, second time) Voice structure / layer design (violins)
186

The slow movement of Tchaikovsky's Fourth is more characteristic of its utterly
Tchaikovskyan stylized counterpoints, notably from m.134 ff, than for those genuinely
thematically based. As such it is kept emotionally on a relatively tight rein as compared to the
slow movements of Nos. 5 and 6; by reducing thematic counterpoint the composer at the same
time reduces intensity or "intensification".
As with earlier examples of this type of movements, Glinka's re-orchestration principle is
once more taken to a level far beyond that of its originator. Each variation is developed
texturally; consequently one episode or variation has an impact upon the ensuing.
The restatement of the opening theme brings along a linear, slightly curved counterpoint, at
this point just hinting at the procedures which follow later. This far it should be but fair to say
that Tchaikovsky manages to create architectonically clean-cut counterpoints to almost any
kind of thematic material. The stylization (1B2') might be derived from the thematic, stepwise
octave-descents at mm.44-45 and 47-48.
Ex.4 II 1Semi-thematic counterpoint
In the middle section of this ternary formed movement, the theme, played by the violins, is
clearly infused with elements from the first movement's main theme (see Ex.4 II 2, m.134),
getting a linearly designed woodwind counterpoint written to it which may be read as a
reinterpretation of the same ideas, and above all as a further elaboration of 1B2:
Ex.4 II 2 Semi-thematic counterpoint
In the next example the seemingly less interesting horn part is included: This layer, from
m.143, might be read as an augmented variant of the already established string-counterpoint
187
(m.142ff) to the second theme, played by the upper woodwinds. There are also other, less
suspect ways by which to interpret this generally ascending horn-part, counterpointing the
melody together with the established string-counterpoint; above all the stepwise "horn-cell" of
the first movement comes automatically into mind.
Ex.4 2 3 Semi-thematic counterpoint (woodwinds / strings)
An increasingly agitated atmosphere is brought in via the chromatically infused triplets. The
rather ordinary melodic second-turns are reminiscent of the first melodic turn (horn cell) of
the main theme. Both clarinet-parts are semi-thematic, although, alternatively, it feels
unproblematic to read the semi-thematic layers of both the previous as well as the present
example as thematically derived inversions. As often, possibly one of the most impressive
features with this and similar examples is the extreme clarity and ease by which each
contrapuntal layer, the extreme chromaticism notwithstanding, is projected.
Ex.4 II 4 Semi-thematic counterpoints
The recapitulation evokes the previously mentioned thematic counterpoint rendered in Ex.4 I
10, where the counterpoint incorporates similarities with elements from both movements.
188

This famous movement is above all a study of striking motion and sonority, taking into
account that it is a nineteenth century creation. The pizzicato part is characterized by its two
layers, each competing of achieving the listener's attention from m.25 ff; one constructed by
winding and wriggling conjunct eighth notes, the other by bouncing notes on the afterbeat.
The composer refers to the movement on behalf of the sonic qualities, stressing contrasts of
timbre among its merits. Even so; the most striking moment is possibly where the brass theme
meets the woodwind theme, and the latter is played by the clarinet above the brass section at
m.185 ff. Yet from m.17 the dialectic texturing is quite obvious; a rising arch in the upper
strings with an unusual harmonic ambience produced by rapid A major/minor, B flat
major/minor and C major/minor shifts moves above a falling melodic arch in the bass, the
latter introducing the afterbeats which are so important for the movement's restless drive.
These afterbeat-arches may owe their existence to the cross-directional arches of the
movement's two opening measures.

Textural coherence, a textural theme - and a fate motto and its consequence
In his four-volume biography on Tchaikovsky the most extensive until date the author
does not abstain from passing harsh verdicts on even the composers most celebrated works.
Here is an excerpt from the belitteling comments about the finale of the Fourth Symphony,
one of the most frequently performed works from the nineteenth century symphonic
repertoire:
() Nor does the sudden intrusion of the fate theme carry much conviction, for none of the other
193
music seems in any way to relate to the emotional world this theme represents ().
In advance of the above citation, the author launches multiple attacks on the movement, but
we start with the present, because this assertion has such a dramatic impact upon his overall
verdict: The biographer totally misses the main clue of this finale; the central march part of
the first theme, not fully stated until m.30ff, is constructed on a retrograde motive from the
symphonys opening motto (Ex.4 IV 1). Thus the Finale theme, built on a retrograde idea
from the motto, purposefully winds its way back to the mottos inescapable and original
193
D AVID B ROWN: Tchaikovsky. The Crisis Years, 1874-1878, W. W. Norton & Co. Inc. , New York - London,
1983, p.176
189
triumphant statement at the end of the work, simultaneously leaving us with several possible
interpretations as regards the composer's - or mankind's - fighting against or, alternatively,
surrendering to fate.
Ex.4 IV 1 The opening "Fate" motto and the Finale's Main Theme; retrograde relationship
The main problem with Browns analysis and reception is not that he completely misses one
of the most vital aspects of the finale; none of us is infallible, least of all the present author. It
is far more problematic that the biographer puts forward his misjudgments in an ironic and
condescending tone, an approach tending to pervade his biography, sometimes leading to the
most disastrous assessments on many of the composers most central works. Confident of his
own analytical infallibility, the biographer concludes with the following words:
It is a rather sad end [italics added] to a symphony which had begun so magnificently. Not until
his very last completed work, the Sixth Symphony of 1893, was Tchaikovsky to find a solution of
the finale problem that was as successful as it was original.
More than ten years later we find a similar verdict concerning the finale in the anthology The
Nineteenth Century Symphony, where the commentator, possibly influenced by Brown,
keeps the myth alive, claiming that
() the last movement is bound to disappoint listeners () There seems to be little
musical motivation for the intrusion of the Fate motto () suggesting that this move indeed depends on a program for its justification" 194,195
In respect of the two commentators, it would be unfair to judge the remaining parts of their
articles in light of the recently disclosed connection between the motto and the finales main
theme. But the authors continue their criticism of this well-known finale, the latter probably
inspired by the former, by claiming there is no relation between the first and second themes.
Yet Tchaikovsky had chosen his folk-song with care: The chief motives of both themes
194
J OSEPH KRAUSS : Tchaikovsky (in The Nineteenth Century Symphony, ed. D. Kern Holoman) Schirmer
Books, London, 1997 p. 375
195
As regards the often commented-upon re-rhythmization of the movements second theme, it is not
completely unlikely that this reworking came about after Tchaikovsky first had constructed the main theme from
the opening motto, thereafter to proceed with the second theme, where he possibly might look for a folksong that
could share some affinities with the main theme. The folk-song should accordingly be in 4/4 meter, or it could
alternatively be reworked into 4/4 meter, as eventually became the fate of the selected folksong In the Meadow
there stood a Birch Tree.
190
conclude in a rather identical way, by two repeated and two descending notes (the march
theme's notes 3-6; Ex.4 IV 2):
Ex.4 IV 2 Thematic cell relation
But Brown continues to criticize the movement by asserting that It lacks even the scope and
ambition of the last movement of the Second Symphony, which Krauss copies thus: the
variations also lack the textural and harmonic range of those based on "The Crane". The
latter quality should not come as a big surprise, since the form of the finale of the Fourth
approximates more that of a rondo, as opposed to the more sonata-orientated finale from
the Little Russian. No doubt the finale of the Second Symphony is a superb movement,
but even so; is it possible that the above commentators have lost even additional aspects
concerning Tchaikovskys architecture? The present author would like to underline one
specific feature with Tchaikovskys musical style; his striving for magnificently transparent
and dialectical textural construction, for the most part achieved as a result of thematically
based counterpoint.196These types of textures do not necessarily have to be realized via
overtly clear thematic elements, they may alternatively be graphically designed stylizations,
though Tchaikovskys graphical approach most often tends to be securely thematically rooted.
In the present finale, the composer reveals this tendency already at the introductory statements
of the folksong. Thus, Brown diminishes Tchaikovskys achievement when he reduces the
folksong to be treated to a series of changing backgrounds. On the contrary, during its
restatements the importance of the folksong becomes gradually reduced, while the listeners
awareness is directed towards what is eventually being counterpointed to it (see Exx.4 IV 4-10).
But even more important: There are architectonic similarities between these "changing
backgrounds", a phenomenon also characterizing textures of the finale of "The Little Russian";
the "backgrounds" are distinct textural ideas developing into "foregrounds", acting on equal terms
with remaining thematic materials. To some extent, this type of textural planning distanced
Tchaikovsky from "The Mighty Handful" as well as Glinka. The finales opening measures
(Ex.4 IV 3), including the four initial notes which open the main themes of each movement
196
For more details, see S VEIN HUNDSNES, Tchaikovskys Orchestral Style Studi Musicali, No2, 10 Rome,
2011
191
(corresponding also to the descending gestalt of the first part of the forthcoming second
theme) have a profound impact upon the orchestration of this finale197.
Ex.4 IV 3 Theme IA, introductory measures
The themes rushing sixteenth-note combinations are included in some of the ensuing
figurations used for counterpointing (alternatively complementing) the folk-song, mostly in
the form of inverted variations. Accordingly, there is an aspect of thematic counterpoint
associated with the overall orchestral strategy, which, on the grounds of being so purely
cultivated in the score, might possibly be classified as a textural theme. In either case there
is a thorough constructional/architectonic angle associated with the sixteenth-note figurations,
which is in itself a truly Tchaikovskyan approach, one he had already demonstrated in several
earlier orchestral pieces. In this respect Tchaikovsky is ahead of his time; in much twentieth
century music the textural layout has a pan-thematic function, and Tchaikovsky manages to
imbue some of his movements with this type of extremely committed, architectonic
orchestration. The x-cell (Ex.4 IV 3) found in almost any musical piece in existence, yet
rarely cultivated as deliberately and purposefully as here forms the accompanying string
figuration complementing the first statement of the folk-song from m.10 (Ex.4 IV 4). This
thematic connection is affirmed by the gradual transition toward the opening theme (m.30).198
Ex.4 IV 4 Textural strategy
The composer utilizes this clear, stylized orchestral strategy in the ensuing variations, as he
continuously explores the motives technical possibilities (Exx.4 IV 5&7): In the m.68
variation (Ex.4 IV 5) the ascending x-variants are hybridized with the inverted, long descent
197
This part of the first theme might possibly represent an elaboration of the opening of the finale in Schumanns
op.47 (with even the concluding eighth-note combination intact), a thematic statement which, in turn, was
possibly a reworking of Beethoven's introduction to Symphony No.3/IV and above all the Finale of Jupiter.
198
In some later, related episodes, the sixteenth-note ascensions begin on the second semiquaver, a construction
reminiscent of the first ascending sixteenth-note figuration in the introductory part of the main theme.
192
reminiscent of the main theme's mm. 2-3, played by the strings, counterpointing the Second
Theme stated by the woodwinds:
Ex.4 IV 5 Textural strategy / Thematic counterpoint
Thus the textural theme continues developing organically from one variation to the next
(Ex.4 IV 6): At mm.76-79 the phrasing is at first elongated vis--vis that of the folk-song. The
textural strategy stemming from Theme 1A is realized by an augmented version of the arched
string layer of the m.10-passage, and the ensuing measures might be read as condensations of
the m.76 arch. Despite differences in respect of phrase-lengths between layers at mm.76-79
the composer maintains contrary motion between the respective layers.
Also worthy of note is the c-cell (the "Tchaikovsky contour", m.81) taken directly from the
symphonys opening motto, which subsequently leaves an imprint on the ensuing organically
transformed texture from m.84. With all due respect of the Kuchka; by now Tchaikovsky has,
by way of architectonically planning and continuously developing his textures, outdistanced
193
them on their own ground, and he has most convincingly transferred Glinkas re-orchestration
principle to the symphonic territory for developmental purpose. In the ensuing variant from
m.84 Tchaikovsky constructs the fundamental eight-measure long arch via x - and c - related
cells, this time lengthened from the original (m.10) one measure to eight measures, paired in
to each other in contrary motion in the first and second violins respectively. This stylized,
compound yet transparent textural layer counterpoints the folk-song.
The textural theme continues forming new hybrids, i.e. new thematic variations, cultivated on
renewed textural fields while building new counterpoints from new shadings of the
introductory part of the main theme. The composer demonstrates this also from m.157, where
the phrasing of the flute emphasizes and breathes new life into already existing, original
aspects of 1A. This counterpoint is instantly interpreted as inverted permutations of the
rushing, sequential sixteenth-notes of measure three:
The developing textural theme, observed also in the lower strings at m.103, leads into an
episode formed by clean thematically based counterpoint, where three variants of the folk
song collide in a textural explosion at m.104 (see Ex.4 IV 9). Although the explosion as such
194
is, like most explosions, short, one observes that the composer lengthens the majority of
contrapuntal layers in form of stylized thematic and/or linear gestalts, exemplified by the horn
and bass-voices of mm.105-6. This is another feature characterizing Tchaikovsky's thematic
counterpoints: They are constructed from symmetrically or in other respects architectonically
well-carved textural layers. The graphical shape as such is one thing, registral locations
another; the textures most often contain just insignificant voice-crossing, and when it appears,
its execution is extremely discreet.
Comparatively fast harmonic tempo is a third general feature characterizing this type of
counterpoint: In this example the harmonic changes come in eighth-note or quarter-note
rhythm, as a hypothetical alternative to simpler solutions, like frequent use of passing-notes or
other non-harmonic notes over a stable chord.
Ex.4 IV 9 (Textural strategy) / Thematic counterpoint
Finally, the previously mentioned four-note cell (see also Ex.4 IV 2) interacts in the intriguing
three part contrapuntal episode which leads to the closing, inevitable statement of the works
opening motto (Ex.4 IV 10). The trumpets and trombones counterpoint each other using
original note values while the strings move from one register to another (textural transfer)
carrying the central, characteristic four-note cell in diminished note-values, modulating
toward and past the stretto at m.195. This third layer gradually breaks away from its thematic
origin, even more so as the brass layers turn toward closer imitation and modulation.
Ex.4 IV 10 Textural transfer (in the strings) & Thematic counterpoint
195
(Ex.4 IV 10, continued)
Prior to the Fourth Symphony Tchaikovsky had utilized the re-orchestration principle in many
of his orchestral works, a procedure clearly inherited from Glinka. But Tchaikovskys
solutions definitely move beyond those of the elder master: Tchaikovsky uses a highly
defined, traceable dialectic double-thematic scoring strategy in this movement. Besides
utilizing differentiated thematic counterpoint, the composer makes use of a textural strategy
running through the movement like a textural theme; an architectonic finesse for which the
composer has won too little musicological acclaim.
One may at this juncture conclude by saying that there is a recurring interplay between the
two themes throughout the piece,199 a finding completely contrary to D. Browns, who, most
surprisingly, proclaims that There is no significant interaction between the various materials.
As the finale is nearing its close, one senses a change as regards texturization. Yet dialectics is
clearly detectable, it moves in direction of timbral contrast and thematic complementation at
the expense of counterpoint. Looking at the symphony as a whole, one might already have
sensed this tendency, which comes most clearly to the fore in the third movement. Although
varied use of counterpoint is highly present in this symphony as a whole, Tchaikovsky's
textural dispositions have moved slightly in direction of powerful, complementary contrasts.
The last three numbered symphonies of Tchaikovsky are his most frequently performed, and
at this point one might wonder whether the noted tendency represents a new approach in his
symphonic production.
199
The retrograde Motto-theme, though, is singled out as an un-counterpointed event.
196
2.5 Symphony No.5 in e minor, opus 64

On reviewing his Fourth Symphony in advance of the printing of the orchestral material,
Tchaikovsky is said to have become so "heartened to discover how good" it looked, that he
told his brother Modest he had begun work upon its successor.200 Composed mainly in 1888,
approximately three years after the voluminous Manfred Symphony opus 58, the Fifth
Symphony represents, by comparison, a return toward the clarified style of the Fourth. It was,
possibly, even more clarified than the latter, according to Brown.201 Obviously, the style of
Manfred had been a natural consequence of the typically romantic drama lying at the core of
Byrons poem, while A. Peter Brown concludes thus about the opening movement of the
Fifth:
The shape of this first movement has strong Classical proportions that, if maintained, allow
the music to speak for itself.202
No wonder, then, if the fleetness of the music, achieved by melodious themes and the (by
now) expected smooth, elegant voice-leading might trick some of us into believing that even
the opening sonata movement lacks in contrapuntal activity, at least compared to the earlier
symphonies.
Tchaikovsky sketched hints of programmatic content during the creation process, and Fate is
suggested to be the recurring motto in all the four movements. As was also the case with the
Fourth Symphony, the significance of this kind of suggestions was later reduced, even
minimized.203 As the composing on the symphony proceeded, Tchaikovsky became
increasingly satisfied with the new work, and conducted its first performance in Moscow.
Although he sometimes expressed uncertainty about the quality of the finale, the work was
never published in revised version.204
200
201
202
David Brown: Tchaikovsky. The Final Years, 1885-1893 (W. W. Norton & Co. Inc. 1991) p. 146
Ibid., p.150
p.402
203
Maes discusses the relevance of programmatic content in Tchaikovsky's last three symphonies in Francis
Maes, Geshiedenis van de Russische muziek: Van Kamarinskaja tot Babi Jar (1996), English translation 2002,
UCLA, pp 159-60
204
Wiley, Roland John: Tchaikovsky, Oxford University Press 2009, p 331
197

Timbral contrast and cultivation of sound-color has always been Tchaikovskyan stamps, even
in symphonic contexts. The introductory Motto is stated by the clarinet in its chalumeau
register, accompanied by dark, soft strings. This setting worked so well that the composer
used a corresponding solution for the bassoon-introduction of the Sixth Symphony.
Maes concludes thus on the first movement:
The entire first movement relies on the tension between the descending,
tendency of the themes and expansion by accumulation and contrast. 205
darkening
The present author agrees completely, yet would humbly like to add "extraordinarily frequent,
propulsive and offensive counterpoint" to the movement's many advantages. A.P. Brown
mentions in particular the rhythmic duality of the movement:
"(...) there are a number of passages that incorporate cross-rhythms. At the beginning, P
(m.42), from its articulations, could be easily inferred as 3/4 rather than 6/8 (...) though its
accompaniment is a straight duple meter. As the exposition unfolds, Tchaikovsky juxtaposes P
in its implied triple meter with passages strongly duple (mm.8o-86)."206
Although differences in respect of time signature occur, there are connections between the
opening motto and the first movement's main theme (m.41 ff.). In addition to the general
thematic and rhythmic characteristics of the two subjects, even apparently insignificant details
of the main theme are used later in the movement as self-assumed units; above all the motivic
element of m.52 and even the inconspicuous and traditional upward run in the flute at m.49.
Ex.5 I 1 Symphony 5/I; Main Theme
When the upper strings restate the main theme at m.57, the ascent at m.49 is used in both
ascending and descending/inverted forms as a separate layer adding to the otherwise steady
march-rhythm (Ex.5 I 2). Later this apparently unimportant run is given a predominant role
205
Francis Maes, Geshiedenis van de Russische muziek: Van Kamarinskaja tot Babi Jar (1996), English
translation 2002, UCLA, p 163
206
p.401
198
throughout the movement, particularly as a phenomenon originating from the main theme (see
also Ex.5 I 3). The conventionalism associated with this figuration, though, only leans toward
semi-thematic significance.
Ex.5 I 2 Semi-thematic counterpoint (excerpt)
Even if one feels reluctant to label this texture as thematic counterpoint, as a consequence of
the inconspicuousness detached to the ascending cell, the textural dialectics, though, is still
striking. Not only is it carried out with consistency; it develops thematic/melodically, for
example in the ensuing passage, first in form of syncopated upward runs from m.66 ff, when
they reaffirm and strengthen their thematic value, moving from having an accompanying role
to a thematic/melodic.
In the midst of this fluent and apparently effortless progress, Tchaikovskys eye for
overwhelmingly clear stylizations reveals itself, when the sixteenth-note figurations transform
to a metrically diminished version / counterpoint of the main theme in the flutes and clarinets
versus the original eighths in the upper strings (Ex.5 I 3). A similar procedure was detected in
the finale of No.2. In addition there is a third contrapuntal layer in form of inversions in the
low strings of the original segment in the upper strings.
Ex.5 I 3 Thematic and semi-thematic counterpoints (the brass hits/markings are omitted)
199
These sixteenth-note combinations, implying change of tone color and varied rhythmic
accentuations, keep exploring new constellations as the first area grows in intensity from
m.84, and the themes opening motive is used in traditional imitation from m.88, added by
disjointed thematic cells:
Ex.5 I 4 Thematic counterpoint (excerpt)
The above imitative procedures keep developing as the main area reaches its peak at m.100 in
a modulatory sequence that leads to the re-harmonized restatement of the theme at m.108:
The restatement is realized via a typically Tchaikovskyan falling bass directed towards the
dominant of the next theme (see Ex.5 I 6). The composer does not immediately let go of this
local counterpoint, but reuses it later in the re-orchestration of the ensuing subsidiary theme
from m.132, then as running eighth-note pizzicato.
200
Ex.5 I 6 Semi-thematic counterpoint, germ for textural counterpoint of all three themes
The downwardly, drizzling woodwind octaves at m.119 (later appearing string pizzicato in the
restatement at 135) that complement the subsidiary theme (starting at 116), may possibly be
read as alterations of the thematic falling fifth of the Closing Theme at 154 ff (Ex.5 I 7). Yet
above all it has been brought into existence via a motive from the main theme at m. 52 (Ex.5 I
1). The subsidiary and closing themes are related not only by key, but also by their melodic
outline (refer mm.116 and 156ff respectively):
Ex.5 I 7 Thematic material, Themes 2 & 3: semi-thematic / textural counterpoints
The continuation of the Closing area, the onset of 3B, consists of two counterpointing
elements, which might be interpreted as being derived from the start and close of 3A2: the
rising woodwind and descending string motives respectively. The violins provide the theme
proper, while the high woodwinds counterpoint by inverting or echoing the theme:
201
Ex.5 I 8 Third Area / Second Theme (3B); Thematic counterpoint (omitted: horns and bassoons)
Theme 3B proceeds into a modulatory paragraph, and the contrary motion in the bass
increasingly establishes itself as a semi-thematic counterpoint, a principle applied to all three
themes. Given the design of the linear parts of the subsidiary and closing themes, it might not
be completely out of place to view these counter-lines as thematic inversions. This tendency is
being strengthened during the ensuing transitory passage:
Ex.5 I 9 Semi-thematic counterpoint (excerpt) and textural transfer (to m.194, Ex.5 I 10)
After a textural transfer of 3B in the upper strings the main and closing themes (3B') meet at
the return of the closing themes dominant (Ex.5 I 10, m.194), before one gets a glimpse of
that themes falling fifth-cell at 198, accompanied by the rhythm of the main theme.
Consequently the transition toward the development section revolves around a persistent 3B
cell.
202
The contrary motion of 3A2 is subsequently exploited still further, until 3A leads to the
development (Ex.5 I 11, m.226). Again, after a rather short separation, the first and third
themes reunite. The counterpoint as such does not put the composer to any insurmountable
test, sooner on the contrary, yet it is effective as a result of the extreme thematic clarity of
both layers. In addition the composer handles his textural contrapuntal line with care;
everything is combined effortlessly without any need of artificial, desperately necessary
adjustments, sometimes labeled motivic development. At 231 the Theme 1 layer absorbs
the stylization-principle by elongating the concluding descent of its opening phrase. As
regards thematic interconnections: Previously a possible link between the falling octave of
Theme 2 and the falling fifth of Theme 3 was being mentioned, a connection which is
affirmed and strengthened during this excerpt from m.231.
Ex.5 I 11 Thematic (winds/upper strings) and semi-thematic/textural counterpoints (low
strings)
(Continued on the next page)
203
The composer combines the themes with an even more subtle nuance by uniting the (measureby-measure) string-crescendo, which was originally associated with the descending octaves of
the Second Theme, with a link to the falling fifths of the Third from m.244; the latter as a
natural consequence of the above m.231 ff counterpoint. Texturally, much of what happens in
the development has been tested out in the exposition, although some harmonic turns
obviously are more dramatic. After a reworking of the main theme from m. 255, which is
inspired by a thematic preparation from the expositions m.84 ff, there is an exemplarily
transparently constructed contrapuntal passage combining elements from all three themes
from m.269. In this passage, the opening phrase of the subsidiary theme is being imitated,
added by a touch of the closing themes falling fifth, everything supported harmonically by a
wind layer carrying the rhythm of the main theme.
204
As concerns the opening of this development one observes that the composer recomposes or
repeatedly develops the construction that incorporates imitation, i.e. two imitative layers, and
one other thematic or texturally contrapuntal layer. The preceding texture leads directly into a
new, related constructional procedure; in the next variation, the main theme rises from an
accompanying to a predominantly imitative, thematic role, added by the recurring descending
bass. (Yet the latter barely qualifies for the designation textural counterpoint in this excerpt.)
However, there is no reason to complain about the semi-thematic bass hemiolas at the climax
of this movement, counterpointing the opening motive of the main theme, given an added
touch of suspense by the syncopated trumpets and horns:
Ex.5 I 14 Semi-thematic counterpoint (excerpt)
The transition toward the coda bears some resemblance with that of the opening movement of
the Violin Concerto: it builds up toward a climax, only to be abruptly relieved by a subito
piano leading to another type of climax. The coda opens with yet another imitation that
involves the main theme, this time combined with a standard bass descent:
205
Ex.5 I 14 Thematic and semi-thematic counterpoints (excerpt)
After having repeated the above descent, the bass (lower strings and brass) first continues in
stepwise contrary motion, then wanders down again to the root of a four-measure dominant
preparation before ending as a culminating ostinato. All in all this movement is remarkable
for the composers stylized thematic development and textural disposition, in addition to its
rhythmical dialectics.
Just as was the case with the main theme of the first movement, the opening horn solo of the
slow movement also brings to mind the opening contour of the motto, after having subtracted
the mottos three repeated, introductory notes.
Ex.5 II 1 Thematic origin of the first theme of movement II
This extremely melodious movement carries Tchaikovskys usual dialectic stamp, which
comes to the fore already in the middle of introductory horn melody as the deep clarinet
comments upon or answers the horn melody:
Ex.5 II 2 Thematic counterpoint, bordering to complementation (extract)
206
At the closing of the first theme, the horn proceeds by counterpointing the second theme,
played by the oboe. The horns role-transition could hardly have been smoother and more
elegantly written, and the two falling melodic sevenths of mm.20-21 forecast the two opening
sixths of forthcoming obo theme:
Ex.5 II 3 Thematic counterpoints
Then follows a brief modulatory passage during which the importance of a two-note cell from
the second theme is being affirmed; notes three and four (from m.33). This cell counterpoints
the ensuing restatement of the first theme and is used in combination with elaborations of
Theme 1-cells in the first oboe (from m.34), including a reworking of the ascent of measure
20 at 35, which in turn transforms from its linear design into ascending broken triads (m.36).
Simultaneously the duplets from the second theme are being absorbed by the first theme at
m.36, played by the cellos, and in the ensuing measure they are picked up by the ascending
broken triad-layer in the upper woodwinds (which had started as triplets in the previous
measure):
207
Ex.5 II 4 Thematic counterpoints (excerpt)
After tarrying over a segment of the first theme (mm.39-45) a soaring imitative statement of
the Second Theme emerges between the strings and woodwinds from m.45. In addition to the
imitative layers, the texture is being supplied with a stylized, descending bass. The triplet /
duplet dialectics comes as an extra poly-linear bonus:
Ex.5 II 5 Semi-thematic and thematic counterpoints (the latter bordering to complementation)
It would not seem too far-fetched to regard the linear bass as a general textural tendency in
this movement. As the intensity increases, the basses continue downward as contrast to the
ascending thematic development in the upper voices, until the latter reach the climax of this
paragraph (m.56) by executing a falling mediantic sequence of the second themes opening
motive. From here the basses counterpoint the theme in ascending stepwise motion,
208
rhythmically answering/imitating it before turning downward again at 59, handing over the
descent to the flute and horn (m.59).
Ex.5 II 6 Semi-thematic counterpoint (voice examples)
The falling second is an emphasized interval of both the first and second themes, on the first
plus seventh and forth plus third scale-degrees respectively. Even the weight assigned to the
themes positioning within their respective measures is quite similar (see, for example, mm.910 and 61-62), in the first theme they appear at the start of the theme, in the second they come
at the end.207 These stepwise, descending, quite withheld notes which appear immediately
after the barlines are also a noteworthy feature with the third theme at m.68 (starting at m.67,
see also m.72 in the following example). The sixteenth-note layer which opens with the
violins at m.91, can definitely be read as originating from the thematic trill of m.72, an
assumption which is being reinforced immediately afterwards by strings at 93-4.
The second statement of the opening phrase is played by the first bassoon, immediately
imitated by the low strings and second bassoon.
Ex.5 II 7 Theme 3 / Hints of thematic counterpoint (not registered in the overview)
207
The closing of this theme (mm.59-60) is, deliberately or not, re-written by Sibelius in his Valse Triste, at the
close of the waltzs first thematic statement. The same composer is also close to plagiarism of a fragment from
the first theme (mm.11-12) of this Tchaikovsky movement in his Seventh Symphony, first movement.
209
The ensuing modulatory paragraph is constructed on an imitation of the themes opening

motive, combined with the - by now - well established, lavishly chromatically furnished bass
line. The first motive of the new theme (m.71) is followed by a reworking of the second
(m.72, but without the trill) at m.76, incorporated in the stylized cello-part. More than with
previous passages, the composer lets his counterpoint adjust more and more to the descending
two-note combination so characteristic of the first two themes.
Ex.5 II 8 Thematic & Semi-thematic counterpoint
The third thematic area is for the most part a continuous display of thematic counterpoint.
Although imitative by nature, the entries sometimes appear rather unpredictably. The threepart imitation between mm.82-86, starting on the fifth, fourth and first scale degrees
respectively, is stabilized by a pedal in the low strings (the pedal is excluded in the example):
Between the above hectic texture and the even more animate development from m.91 (Ex.5 II
10) the composer inserts a laidback variation of the texture between mm.75-78 (Ex.5 II 8),
without utilizing the thematic nonuplets and sixteenth-notes. The elegant bass line is still
there, but it is transformed into a sustained half-note-descent, yet adheres to the initial
progression:
210
Ex.5 II 10 Thematic and textural counterpoints
The thematic nonuplet (m.68), with its repeated melodic seconds, instigates the creation of the
string layer, which counterpoints the first four measures of the theme from m.91, the first two
measures working as textural, motivic transfer to the continuation (Ex.5 II 11). This
intensification of the movement leads to a transitory stretto before the motto climax at m99
(see also Ex.5 II 12):
The ensuing stretto between m.95-98 is primarily constructed on the third theme's stepwise
note 3-6-cell, counterpointed by its own inversions. The dramatic lines and partially
chromatic counter-lines in the woodwinds and strings are balanced harmonically by the
trumpets and horns, and together with the tuba, kettledrum and double basses the listener is
left with a cadencial 6/4-suspension, leading to the Motto climax on the sixth degree's third
inversion (m.99); the dominant, leading to the recapitulation.
Ex.5 II 12 Hint of thematic counterpoint
211
Pizzicato strings and an oboe-counterpoint accompany the first theme, the latter played by the
first violins. The counterpoint is at first inspired by the actual theme, then gradually
influenced by both the second and third themes: From m.116 the first theme is being imitated
by the first horn. From here the thematic wavering sixteenth's originating from the m.91-94
passage return in the first clarinet, but above all these figurations are clearly derived directly
from the third theme. At m.118 the peak of this clarinet counterpoint is represented by the
previously mentioned accentuated falling second in a brief, emotionally charged falling
sequence, finally rounding off the phrase at 119, echoing the theme of the violins.
The oboe and clarinet counterpoints of this passage thus contain a distillate of the main
thematic ingredients of this movement. In addition, they once again demonstrate that there are
several very characteristic aspects to Tchaikovsky's counterpoints: Besides of being
technically superior, they possess strong architectonic qualities, and more often than not they
are driven in one direction or another; they lead somewhere.
Ex.5 II 13 Thematic counterpoints
The clarinet counterpoint, stressing the quadruple element of the previous texture, continues
in the high woodwinds, as the first theme proceeds at m.120 in the bassoons and first violins.
The combining of slurred versus tenuto phrasing enhance thematic relationships already
established. The counterpoint, now closer associated with the second than the third theme, is
realized via an arched contour, which was also the case with the last half of the previous
passage:
212
In addition to developmental qualities already associated with Tchaikovsky's counterpoints,

like textural transfer, it is high time to mention development on a general level: The threenote turn, adapted from the nonuplet cell, attracts gradually more attention. This layer grows
in importance, even steeling focus from the layers representing the first theme: Between
m.128-137 the quadruple layer of the high and mid strings represent a forceful realization and
fulfillment of the potentials hidden inside this seemingly ornamental trill. The noble bass-lines
and the overall well balanced textural architecture with its directionally controlled layers
come as extra bonuses in addition to the developmental aspects:
Ex.5 II 15 Thematic (and semi-thematic) counterpoint
From m.134 the quadruplet-counterpoint transforms from static syncopation to un-syncopated

downward motion, indicating the beginning of a transition toward the elevated and noble
Andante mosso return of the second theme. An ascending line counterpoints this descent:
Ex.5 II 16 Thematic (and semi-thematic) counterpoint
213
The second theme draws on the same dramaturgy as in the expository m.45 - statement, yet
utilizing an expanded instrumentation. The expected climax is postponed, thus challenging the
composer to stretch his bass-line even longer than he did in the initial statement:
Ex.5 II 17 Semi-thematic counterpoint (the thematic, imitative counterpoint is not rendered)
This extremely singable tune then seems to die out, when the Motto all of a sudden interferes
in fff from m.158-165. From m.171, the second theme finally dies out, closing the movement.
Once more the theme is presented within a renewed imitative framework:
Ex.5 II 18 31 Thematic counterpoint (triplet accompaniment in the woodwinds and horns)

As was also the case with the first theme of the second movement, the main theme of this
waltz is closely related to the contour of the opening motto. Tchaikovsky first heard the
theme's main material sung in a street in Florence, extending it with a retrospective b-part.
Thus there is a link between the various movements which is not just dependant on the motto
insertions into each movement, but which is, in addition, thematical (Ex.5 III 1), not only as
regards the obvious connection with the Theme's opening, but which corresponds even more
closely to five notes of the Motto from m.20ff (see also Ex.5 III 2 ) :
Ex.5 III 1 Motivic connections between movements
214
Even in the finale, the introductory motto-statements lead to the withheld falling second, first
at m. 20, camouflaging a turn that foreshadows the opening of that movement's main theme.
Even in his less pretentious type of movements like this ternary form, Tchaikovsky displays
his customary dialectical approach. As the opening phrase is restated, it is counterpointed by
thematic inversions and variations: Besides the more conventional contrary motion between
the violins and violas/cellos at mm.12-13, the transitory thematic variation between the two
statements (mm. 8-11) is used in the viola/cello counterpoint at14 (-15) together with the
counterpoint's inversion in the obo and flute at m.16 (-17).
Ex.5 III 2 Thematic counterpoint (score excerpt)
The composer manages to retain a light, airy style while adding sporadic counter-lines and
thematic counterpoints. An elegant, chromatically designed line counterpoints the concluding
statement of the theme. Because of the waltz-theme's introductory stepwise six-note
descent208 one might regard the counterpoint from m.45 as thematical, but since there are but
inferior
thematic
characteristics,
it
is
labeled
semi-thematic,
its
striking effect
notwithstanding.
Ex.5 III 3 Semi-thematic counterpoint
A more than fifty measure long middle section (from m.73), containing a fluttering thematic
sixteenth-note layer and contrasting staccato or legato eighth- or quarter-note cells, constitute
what may with justification be labeled as 'textural counterpoint': The sixteenth-note layer also
208
The ending of the motto's opening phrase is also a stepwise six-note descent.
215
makes service as transition and thereafter as a counterpoint to the returning waltz theme. It is
not unlikely that the onset of this figuration is part of a development which had started in the
second movement at. m.68, a suspicion strengthened by the figuration's trill-like onset,
transformed at 91 ff. Thus there is a tangible sense of continued development in the third
movement from movement II, m.91 ff.
Ex.5 III 4 Thematic counterpoint (score excerpt)
Theoretically speaking one might even regard parts of the textural dialectics from m.73 as
thematic: The two-note cell, with an accentuation on the first note, grows in importance until
m.89, reminiscent of the endings of the concluding phrase of the motto and the first themes of
the middle movements, both in respect of phrasing and stepwise motion. In spite of these
facts, the composer does not seem very concerned about underlining further thematic
connections in this vivid central part of the movement. The textural dialects are further
enhanced via frequent use of hemiolas, a phenomenon occurring in the majority of
Tchaikovsky waltzes and last but not the least via the composer's usual sense of timbral
contrast: The flowing sixteenth-note figurations are kept in either the woodwinds or the
strings, with ditto complementary figuration from m.72 until 152.

Having added one sharp for the home key with each new movement, the composer opens the
Finale209 with the Motto, this time maestoso in the major mode, as contrast to the first
movement's subdued introduction in the minor. The first statement leads to a thematic
fragment, keeping the motto's rhythmic characteristics as signals in the trumpets and horns,
combined with an inverted motivic contour from m.15 in the strings and bassoons:
209
The movement begins and closes in E major, but its central part is in e minor.
216
Ex.5 IV 1 Hint of thematic counterpoint (score extract)
From here the string layer is intensified as it moves from duplets to triplets. The constantly
repeated turning triplets from m.23 might be read as inversions of the main theme's opening
cell210, which were also molded into the mm.20-23 phrase. This connection is finally
gradually confirmed in the withheld transition before the main theme itself, between mm.43 58, just the way the link between the motto and the main theme is made obvious later on; in
the trumpets from m.199.
In addition to the triplet layer of the strings, the motto in the high woodwinds is
counterpointed by its own "tail"-fragment, attached to the motto's second measure in the horns
and bassoons. Even though the turning-cell as such looks and is trivial, Tchaikovsky
compensates by constructing a consistent architectonic layer from it.
Ex.5 IV 2 Hint of thematic counterpoint (score excerpt)
This textural field stretches over fifteen measures until m.39, where it becomes more
intensified, not only as a result of the crescendo from 32: The triplet-notes convert from eights
to sixteenths in the strings and their linear contour becomes more agitated, partly moving by
contrary motion. Thus gaining in attention vis--vis the horizontal, stylized trumpet calls until
m.43, the thematic orientation toward the main area (m.58) begins in earnest. Once stated,
connections between the motto and the main theme211 are palpable.212
210
The "probability test" (implying the question "Is this connection more likely here than in another symphony
by T.?") supports this assumption, the cell's inconspicuousness notwithstanding: Here Tchaikovsky uses such a
cell in order to form a layer by thematic argument, like in Symphony No3 and, above all, in No.6 III.
211
The connection is affirmed most convincingly at mm.199-204
217
Ex.5 IV 3 Thematic connections between the motto and the main theme213
Tchaikovsky utilizes the tension between the three-note turning-cell of the theme (m.58) and
the opening motive in accentuated counterpoint. This dialectic is implemented from the fifth
measure (m.70) of the restatement by the horns (beginning at m.66), counterpointing 1A2 in
the woodwinds in contrary motion. The triplet layer in the high strings is about to be phased
out:
Ex.5 IV 4 Thematic counterpoint (primarily in the winds)
The closing of the first theme of the main area does not just display Tchaikovsky's customary
eye for magnificent counter-lines214, one also senses the "two-plus-two" afterbeat
constellations of the previous example from m.78ff, still dominated by the brass section.
(continued on the next page)

212
Some might even want to read the Subsidiary Theme's notes 3-7 as a contour descending from the Motto.
For further cross-thematic references, see also David Brown: Tchaikovsky. The Final Years, 1885-1893 (W.
W. Norton & Co. Inc. 1991) p.155
213
214
Once again it should be noted that these lines may be read as local as well as purely thematic counterpoints,
since both the motto and the main theme contain stepwise descents.
218
The two-plus-two phrasing of the cell in Example 5 IV 4 (and 5 IV 5) is changed into threeplus-three combinations during the second thematic segment of the main area,
counterpointing the new material. As with the previous example, contrary motion between the
most predominant layers contributes in strengthening their respective independence and
individuality.
Ex.5 IV 6 Thematic counterpoint (mm.82-83, 86-87 etc.)
The ensuing variation above a pedal on e combines 1A- and 1 B - elements linearly in long,
imitative phrases. This passage is shaped as a long, curved, singable, contrapuntally intriguing
phrase, particularly from m.98. Rightfully satisfied with it, the composer repeats this idea in
transposed version on his modulatory way toward the final transitory passages before the
subsidiary theme.
219
These imitations stretch from m.98 to 114, where the contrapuntally semi-local stepwise line
is set in contrary motion against a hybrid of this line and the 1B rhythm. The pedal on a
continues into this modulatory phase, within which the ties between the present and the
previous paragraphs are being reinforced, and the thematic material is further developed.
Tchaikovsky's solution is, not to our surprise, a stylized clarification. The following score
excerpt only displays two thematic layers of this escalating tutti passage.
Ex.5 IV 8 Thematic and Semi-thematic (from m.114) counterpoints
The most predominant layer in the final transitory passage before the subsidiary theme (Ex.5
IV 9) grows out of the climax at mm.118-19; the two-note, persistent bass idea played by the
timpani, deep strings and bassoons. This layer eventually forms the bass beneath the
subsidiary theme, and grows in importance in the ensuing textures. The origin of this
ostensibly trivial perpetuum mobile stems from the first notes of the main theme, which
became more markedly expressed by the two-note, slurred sf - mf counterpoints from m.70ff
(see also Ex. 5 IV 4).215This easy-flowing theme is accompanied by slurred off-beat triplets in
the violins and violas. In addition, the seemingly inconspicuous fourth layer of this texture is
formed as a completely symmetric arch by the horns: It enters by a simple rising triad, stays
on a pronounced dominant pedal and exits the way it entered; by way of a descending
dominant triad.
215
This stylization, together with the line-stylizations, might equally well have been labeled as 'semi thematic';
they are clearly thematic per se yet at the same time their roles in the texture differ from the more clearly
thematic layers like, for example, the thematic layers from m.98. This movement represents but one of
comparatively few examples in which some of Tchaikovsky's thematic counterpoints stem from microscopic
cells.
220
Ex.5 IV 9 Subsidiary Theme; Thematic & local counterpoints
The second area modulates to the submediant, where one observes that the rather anonymous
bass layer increases in importance as it is adopted by four horns at m.148, and the composer
underlines its importance by adding a clear lead-in to it (Ex.5 IV 10). Worthy of note is, as
usual, the sonic clarity: Each layer is given its individual, distinct timbral quality. Unresolved
register-conflicts are avoided.
Ex.5 IV 10 Thematic counterpoint (Theme 2)
As shown in Ex.5 IV 11, these thematic elements continue their contrapuntal interaction with
the syncopated continuation of the theme toward the modulatory, transitory sequenzations
leading to the Motto statement at m.172. Worthy of note is also the impact the upwardly
eighth-note run before m.160 has on both the actual transition and the ensuing motto textures:
After having led in to the first modulatory passage, the ascent is being expanded and made
221
linear from m.164. Thereafter it is being further developed and expanded from m.168 where
each idea goes through a stylization which is extremely efficient in the modulatory stretto at
mm.168-171. Reminiscences of the earlier mentioned accentuated falling second are possibly
accidental, but, whether deliberately pan-thematic or not, the textural clarity and consistency
is nonetheless convincing: This two-note cell acts in different note values in three different
layers from m.168. Observe also how gradually the eighth-note layer has been established.
Ex.5 IV 11 Thematic development/transition & Thematic counterpoint (notably from m.168)
The way the eighth-note layer keeps developing is equally notable as are the neighbor-note
combinations as such: its transformation and enhanced significance from m.163-64 to 168
leads on to a dramatically more predominant role as it complements the Motto from m.174 by
its own inversions and in the shape of an extended gestalt of the m.168-171-figuration:
222
The seamless switch between the Motto and the main theme from m.199 is primarily a
consequence of purely thematic similarities.216 Thematic inversions between the outer brasslayers contribute in reinforcing the thematic splicing and the entire textural architecture:
Ex.5 IV 13 Material connection & Thematic counterpoint
This part of the Main theme (1A2) continues with a counterpointing viola and bassoon line, or
rather; two paired tetrachords, instigated by the above bass ascents (m.205-8):
One may wonder if the triadically designed, long brass notes that counterpoint the main theme
in the transition between mm.210-30 is a textural idea that has emerged gradually, from, at
least, the horns' arch construction at m.128. Probably they are reborn from the transitory
whole-notes concluding the Motto at its first statement, which reappear in this movement at
mm.20-21. The dramatic power of these textures is above all due to thematic treatment and
not the counterpoints between mm.210-32 as such; the turmoil caused by thematic activity in
the woodwinds and strings is no doubt effective, as projected against the solid, stately brass.
Yet the feeling of being exposed to a Tchaikovskyan texture comes equally much from the
long arch-formed layers of the upper strings between mm.220-49.
By contrast, thematic counterpoint is more predominant in the development from m.234, with
two imitatively projected Theme 2 layers versus hint of a Theme 1 layer, the latter focusing
216
Commentators differ on how they should define these stretches. A. Peter Brown labels the first half of the
Motto (m.172ff.) and the Main Theme (m.202 ff.) as two Closing Themes. See A. Peter Brown: The Symphonic
Repertoire Volume III Part B (Indiana University Press, Bloomington 2008) p.408
223
on its opening motive. The opening cell of the main theme is used as accompaniment to the
imitative layers derived from the subsidiary theme:
The development continues with a slightly varied textural approach: the first violins change
material from Theme 1 to permuted Theme 2 cells (Ex.5 IV 16, see also Ex.5 IV 11).
However, the dialectic span between the Theme 2-layer in the woodwinds versus the
pounding Theme 1-figurations of the middle strings attracts most attention as a result of their
immediately recognizable thematic origins.
The subdued retransition (m.266ff.) is very much in line with the transition between the
introduction and the Main Theme. However, there are notable dialectics present even here; the
224
half-notes of the woodwinds echo their previous association with the subsidiary theme,
complementing the strings, who carry the main theme's opening cell.
The main theme in the low strings and woodwinds is challenged by an offensive counterpoint
(see Ex.5 IV 17). In reality the original theme is being overpowered, since the latter is being
stated by the trumpets, horns, high strings and woodwinds. First the counterpoint is a tonal
and metric augmentation of the introductory cell (mm.296-97); then the falling fourth is
inverted, still with the use of augmented tone-lengths (mm.296-97). After that the next five
notes are inverted (mm.297-98), the opening cell is highly present in mm.299-300, while a
compressed version of the themes introductory phrase is felt in mm.299-301.
Ex.5 IV 17 Thematic counterpoint (from the recapitulation, represented by the high and low
woodwinds and strings respectively):
From m.304 it is presented in invertible counterpoint, which is in itself a comparatively

simple continuation, yet fully forgivable in light of the previous exertion.
The less striking contrapuntal passage between mm.168-71 of the exposition is extended in
the recapitulation (between mm.421-25), thus prolonging the modulation to the expectant eminor return of the motto, this time stated Poco meno mosso (m.426). In this the eighth-note
layer acts mostly as pure diminutions of the descending, thematic quarter-note cell. Even
though the descending thematic layer of the highest voices appears to be sequential, the
counterpoints, as such, are not:
225
The culmination of the subsidiary theme leads into a sustained paragraph heralded by the
introductory notes of the Motto. The elegance by which this is carried out is worthy of note:
The preceding transitory passage transfers the quarter-note cell of the subsidiary theme
seamlessly into counterpointing the Motto. An extra, though significantly less impressive
counterpoint is represented in the texture by the main theme's introductory three-note cell,
expanded to fourths and sixths in the high woodwinds and horn respectively, before both
layers adopt the motto cell. The motive of the subsidiary theme continues on its way
downward from m.420 to 433 (until m.435 in the double-basses).
At m.434-5 the Motto and the Main theme is linked together in the trumpet parts (Ex.5 IV
20), while the theme's opening cell (1A1A) is scattered between the basses (m.433), trumpets
and violins plus flutes (m.435). Joined together by these thematic details, the bass instruments
lead downward to the ensuing Molto vivace, where the low strings and woodwinds form a
new contrapuntal layer against the Motto rhythm in the trumpets and horns.
Ex.5 IV 20 Thematic and semi-thematic counterpoints
The molto maestoso motto statements between mm.472-503 draw on both previous and new
contrapuntal materials. The layers are divided by instrument groups: The woodwinds play the
226
undulating eight-triplet layer, which was also a notable layer early in the movement. Yet
between mm.472-88 it is crafted more offensively, moving up and down as often as the motto
permits: Even though the three melodic layers are not segregated by registers, the composer
allows all three to project well within the texture. The second melodic layer consists of
references both to the motto and the main theme, and is played by the trumpets and horns in
the first half of this textural field, the second is played by the horns only. The violins, violas
and cellos play the motto in its original (major) form. In the restatement from 490 to 496 the
trumpets and oboes play the motto, and the high strings and flutes counterpoint with a
sixteenth-note layer (divided to thirty-two-notes in the strings), adapted and developed as an
intensification of the previous eighth-note triplet layer.217
In the concluding Presto the composer lives up to our contrapuntal expectations by letting the
instruments belonging to the treble register perform a variation of the main area's second
theme while the bass registers take care of the first theme:
From m.518 (Ex.5 IV 22) the perpetuum mobile that previously accompanied the Subsidiary
theme, does exactly the same in this concluding variation, where its origin from the Main
theme once again is becomes obvious in the low strings and bassoons. Worthy of note is also
the stepwise transfer in the high and low thematic layers from the previous to the ensuing
textural field. The high strings and woodwinds transcend from 1B to a compressed fusion of
2A and the syncopated 2B. In addition, two trumpets, two horns and the first trombone
perform a variant of the perpetuum layer, which is the inversion of 1A:
217
In this writer's view, this passage is probably the most critical moment within Tchaikovsky's entire
symphonic output as regards concluding with success or failure: The result depends particularly much on the
conductor. The purpose of this moment is triumph and victory, yet if the counterpoints are underplayed, which
they sometimes are, the textures completely lose their dialectic span, substituting heroism with bombast. An
unqualified guess would be that Tchaikovsky experienced this problem several times, instigating cuts in the
score; changes that have, unfortunately, been lost.
227
In the modulatory passage from m.526, the syncopations and ensuing half-notes of 2B are
augmented, constructed as a counterline to the ascending runs in the violins and flutes.
Although admittedly contrived, the lines not only represent cells of the Motto and both the
Finale themes, they are even more reminiscent of the main theme of the first movement,
which is restated at m.546, towards which they serve as transition:
Finally, the main theme of the first movement ends the symphony, more often than not played
considerably slower than what is indicated by the composer.
After a poly-linear analysis of Tchaikovsky's Fifth Symphony one is struck by the

considerable amount of contrapuntal weight that is laid upon the work, its melodiousness
notwithstanding. This particularly goes with the second movement, which is so packed with
memorable melodies that from a non-analytical perspective the movement may seem
unfocused and disjointed. Yet in accordance with our previous findings, Tchaikovsky may
sometimes be compared to a gardener who manages to breed incredibly new and
differentiated hybrids from one single plant. This plantation is welded together by a wealth of
228
thematically based counterpoint, and the overall majority of textures within the movement are
contrapuntal. Yet all this considered; on examining the textures of the finale, their thematic
use range from incredibly focused and sustained, like the Exx.5 IV 7-8, to less powerful
solutions, like counterpoints consisting of shorter, repeated cells - for the most part
represented by the main theme's three opening notes - in addition to less thematically
significant stylized forms.
229
2.6 Symphony No.6 in b-minor (Pathtique"), op.74

The Sixth Symphony was composed in 1893, and Tchaikovsky completed the orchestration
just a couple of months before his death in November that year. The composer conducted the
first performance only a few weeks before he died, and much effort and speculation has been
invested around the circumstances of the composer's death: Did he catch cholera out of bad
luck, did he drink contaminated water deliberately or did he commit suicide by poisoning
himself after having been sentenced to death by "court of honor"? Or, did he die of other
reasons, reasons which have been concealed from the public eye? Above all: did the composer
compose the Sixth Symphony with the intention of creating his own requiem? 218In any case
Tchaikovsky's Sixth is a work full of drama and contrast and we may have in mind if it is
possible to detect any palpable technical change in the work as regards textural disposition
and construction compared to his previous symphonies. As concerns the possibility that
Tchaikovsky with this work deliberately wrote his own Requiem, it might already at this stage
be but fair to say that it is highly exceptional for any composer who does not suffer from a
physical disease to plan and compose an extensive symphonic work; a piece which today
belongs to the symphonic canon, with the intention of taking his own life after the work's
completion. One should also take into consideration the fact that the composer concurrently
made substantial sketches for future works in his sketchbook. During this period he also
planned tours as conductor of his own works, thus a possible suicide becomes even less
plausible.
The musical material of the introductory bassoon solo (mm.1-6) is strongly reminiscent of the
first measures of Beethoven's Pathetique sonata, even the opening phrase-structures of both
works share obvious similarities. The Main Theme (Ex.6 1) opens with the introductory
motive 1Aa at mm.19-20, followed by an ornamented variant (1Ab) at 20-21, which, in turn,
is transformed to 1Ac at 21-22. Each motive will later tear loose from their thematic origin
and operate on its own in separate layers during the movement. In the development the
218
The reader who wants to dig deeper into this problem may benefit from reading A. Poznansky's book
"Tchaikovsky's Last days", Oxford University Press, 1996. The following volumes (in English writing) also
contain extensive debate on the issue: Anthony Holden; Tchaikovsky, (Transworld Publishers, London, 1995)
and David Brown: Tchaikovsky. The Final Years, 1885-1893 (W. W. Norton & Co. Inc. 1991)
230
introductory motive is predominant, and in the exposition it evolves continuously, leading to

segregated paragraphs which in this document are labeled as separate thematic variations,
mostly for operational reasons. As has already been observed being the case with
Tchaikovsky, the thematic development is restless, drastic and challenging. The composer has
several times in his career managed to transform and renew his material to the extent of
making it seem brand new, rather than developed. The stepwise, falling, slurred two-note cell
of the opening motive is the weightiest cell of this theme. Even as Tchaikovsky exposes his
main theme (Ex.6 1) the use of this cell demonstrates Tchaikovsky's imprint technique; a cell
of one phrase or sub-phrase is given a central role in the ensuing phrase.
Ex.6 1 Thematic elements (Theme 1A)
The rescored restatement of this phrase (m.23, Ex.6 2) leads into thematic counterpoint in
which the two first motives (1Aa, 1Ab) counterpoint a variation of the third (1Ac) from m.30
ff. As the listener is being guided toward the latter variation, the third motive, not
unexpectedly, is brought to its new register via textural transfer:
Ex.6 2 Restatement, transitory passage and hint of thematic counterpoint (from m.30)
A brief modulatory passage (mm.34-37) leads to a descent in the violins, wherein the thematic
motives from the first theme transcend in direction of what shall become elements for the
second theme of the first area219. In m.37 the notes of 1Ac are articulated staccato, changing
219
In his structural overview of this movement A. Peter Brown operates with only one ten-measure theme in the
Main Area (mm.10-19) and five transitory paragraphs or themes ("Transition Materials") from m.20 to 90 in A.
Peter Brown: The Symphonic Repertoire Volume III Part B (Indiana University Press, Bloomington 2008) p.420.
This is a very reasonable alternative, particularly since the introductory motive, which is also used in the first
231
to paired legato at the top of the ascent of m.38, a slurring which in turn is prolonged over
eight notes in the ensuing, related theme (m.42ff, see also Ex.6 4). Later, these inconspicuous
notes are completely reinvented in an intense dramatic texture in the development. Even the
staccato horn signals, which operate between m.39 to 41, are related to 1Ac, but, above all,
they represent and announce a thematic motive which opens the next thematic paragraph, 1B.
These actions take place above an augmented version of the permuted opening motive, 1A', in
the low strings (observe also the slur between notes 3-4):
Ex.6 3 Motivic / thematic development & hint of thematic counterpoint (from m.39)
Among the three main ideas making up the ensuing theme, two; 1B1 and 1B2, counterpoint
each other already at the initial statement (Ex.6 4). Both ideas lead to the rather trivial 1B3220,
and are used in inverted registers, as in mm. 42-44 and 44-46. In the forthcoming analyses,
stepwise ascents or descents are mainly referred to as 1B2 material unless performed staccato
(1Ac). As for the rhythm of 1B1, this will in turn accompany the second paragraph of the
Subsidiary theme.
theme, rules the development section more than any other thematic idea in the exposition. Furthermore, some
materials from the Main Area are later made use of in the Subsidiary. Yet there are some notable exceptions, as
the present examination will later demonstrate. Relationships between themes and even between the main and
subsidiary areas are far from foreign to the symphonic repertoire as such, and certainly not to Tchaikovsky, and
as long as the material is continuously developed, this author, in general, finds no good reason for not keeping
labeling it as Main Theme material.
220
We encountered a similar, seemingly uninteresting idea once before in a Tchaikovsky symphony; in the slow
movement of No.5. In that movement, it was adapted very convincingly for a vivid paragraph, during which the
idea's status was raised dramatically. In the Subsidiary Area's Moderato Mosso paragraph of No.6/I there is a
strikingly similar construction to that of No.5/II; both share counterpointing triplet versus duplet layers, and in
addition, the "inconspicuous" motive is used in various forms of trills: In No.6/I 1B3 is later read as sextuplets
and septuplets in the low strings.
232
Ex.6 4 Paragraph two of the Main Area / Thematic Counterpoint
In the third paragraph of the main Area Tchaikovsky returns to a closer variant of 1Ac at
m.50. The composer inserts an ascending woodwind idea in contrary motion to this particular
statement, 1C1, which foreshadows the final transitory stage before the Subsidiary Theme (at
mm.86-88), while it is in other respects thematically insignificant. In addition the composer
supplies the texture with another rather inferior element, the dotted horn signal at m.51ff;
1C2, adapting some of the descending contour and textural role of 1B2, whose main function
is to give harmonic support to the dominating string-layer. Although some textural elements
cross registers, the composer remains true to his preference for keeping separate ideas within
separate instrument groups.
Ex.6 5 Paragraph three of the Main Area, Thematic counterpoint (from m.51)
233
The 1C paragraph contains two texturally related constructions. The second (see Ex.6 I 6),
which is developed from the previous, consists of an imitative version of a permuted,
developed 1C3a (based on gradually reshuffled 1Ac elements, see also m.51:4/cellos),
resulting in the inverted and augmented motive 1C3b at m. 54 ff. Although there seems to be
no obvious reason for this new labeling at this stage (or, one might alternatively labeled this
phrase differently already from m.50) the closing cell of the developed phrase, 1C3b, puts a
particular imprint upon this paragraph's concluding fanfare outburst later on.
This paragraph concludes with the already foretold fanfare, by which the composer makes a
direct amalgamation of the symphony's opening motive and the one that closes 1C3b (see
Ex.6 7). In this passage 1C3a counterpoints itself (at mm.66-7 and 68-9) in the woodwinds
and strings respectively, 1C3b counterpoints itself in the trumpets/trombones and horns in
mm.68, immediately followed by 1C3b in the horn and bassoon, counterpointing 1C3a in the
woodwinds. As is usually the case with Tchaikovsky, separate contrapuntal layers are
presented within separate registers, presented by contrasting instrument groups (see Ex.6 7). It
may be noted that the melodic close of 1C3b (1C3b2) is far from being a commonplace
procedure, being constructed by a falling (for the most part diminished) third and a
concluding rising second. Because of its rather unusual construction it is probably not just a
coincidence that the opening phrase of the forthcoming movement also closes in an almost
identical way, although after a melodic ascent:
234
This climax of the main area instigates the retardation and culmination of an incessantly
repeated 1C3a. There are two features of the transition toward the subsidiary area that are
worthy of note: The ascent leading to the onset note of the introductory descent of the
subsidiary theme221 and above all the importance placed on 1C3a. There are, possibly,
features of this nine-note motive (ref. 66-67 and 68-69 in the woodwinds) resonating vaguely
in the opening phrase of the ensuing second area's first theme (mm.90-91). Yet the new
theme's opening is, above all, even more reminiscent of 1B2 (see also Ex.6 4). The reason for
singling out 2A1a' will be revealed later; the present variant concludes the exposition.
Ex.6 8 Theme 2A (2A1 & 2A2)222
As the above example indicates, there is only insignificant contrapuntal activity during the
statement of the subsidiary theme (m.102 ff). This, however, is rectified in the ensuing
221
About this transition, see also David Brown: Tchaikovsky. The Final Years, 1885-1893 (W. W. Norton &
Co. Inc. 1991) pp 447-8
222
The + symbol refers to incidents where also the first of the repeated notes is represented in the thematic
work, like some of the tone repetitions / syncopations of the development, wherein different lengths/stretches of
2A2 are quoted. Two repeated notes, beginning on the anacrusis, are also present in the ensuing theme (2B2). In
the forthcoming analysis, the origin of this note-combination is so vague that the material is labeled as belonging
to the Second Area and not 2A or 2B specifically. As for 2A2b, this accentuated, slurred two-note cell is at times
used separately in some textures, but it is also associated with notes 3-4 of the main theme.
235
paragraph: The thematic material (2B1) is presented imitatively, and the imitative layers are
accompanied by a rhythmization of 1B1 (Ex.6 9, see also Exx.6 3&4).
Ex.6 9 Thematic statement (2B1) & thematic counterpoint
Tchaikovsky then increases the number of thematic ingredients as the theme continues (Ex.6
10) by inserting a stylized 2B1(a), which had initially been utilized in an imitative type of
texture (see also Ex.6 9). Here it counterpoints the theme's prolongation; 2B2; a melodic
phrase strongly related to 2A2. This texture has much in common with some of the textures
presented in the slow movement of the Fifth Symphony; even the trill-element, 1B3, is
present, together with the harmonic background presented via the rhythm of 1B1. Despite
their variety as regards phrase lengths and physical direction each thematically based layer is
projected convincingly clear, due to the composer's customary separation of timbres and
registers, the contrary motion of B1 and B2 notwithstanding:
Ex.6 10 Thematic statement (2B2) & Thematic counterpoints
236
A broad restatement of 2A culminates with Moderato assai (Ex.6 11), wherein cells deriving
from 2A1 (for the most part 2C) and 2A2b (see also Ex.6 I 8) are used over a pedal on d in the
transitory rallentando toward Adagio mosso rounding off the exposition. The latter simply
represents a continuation of the previous phrase, and both elements are inversions of their
original cells, in original or permuted forms, and relative note lengths as well as slurs confirm
their origins. 2C is a spin-off from the concluding 2A1c at m.142. In addition to these central
melodic ingredients there is even an echo of 1C3b (see also Ex.6 7, m.68). As was the case
with that example, this motive is performed by the trumpets and horns. The woodwind and
string layers represent two different thematic ingredients evolving parallel to each other.
Ex.6 11 Thematic counterpoints
The work's introductory "Pathetique" motive (1Aa) is as inconspicuous as it is highly

applicable. After a ferocious opening of the development (m.162), in which the motive is
prolonged and chromatically permuted, the first motives of the main theme are counterpointed
against two of its variants: In the viola part of mm.172-73 the motive is observed as the four
high notes of the melodic curves, which may above all be interpreted as expanded contours of
the same motive, and in the two ensuing measures the motive is used in ascending sequence:
Textures constructed from these elements continue over approximately nineteen measures,
during which 1Ab is transported to the high registers of the violins, flutes and clarinets. From
m.191 it counterpoints a descent in the trumpets, oboes and bassoons which is mainly
associated with the descending phrase of the Subsidiary Theme:
237
Ex.6 13 Textural transfer Textural/thematic counterpoint
As seen before with similar Tchaikovskyan symphonic climactic passages, the textural
counterpoint is arch-shaped. But there are more qualities to the texture than what has already
been noted: When 1Ab returns to the low register (see Ex.6 14), there is an echo of it
counterpointing a new segment: the phrase of a traditional chant from the Russian requiem.
The centre of this phrase contains the augmentation of a contracted 1Ab variant heard right in
advance (m.201). But the clarinet transition to the development, constructed on 2A material,
had already forecasted and stressed the quotation twice (mm. 158-160), then in the major
mode. Here both the gradual motivic diminishment, as well as the descent which had already
started from m.197, contribute in underlining the requiem atmosphere. The question remains:
Did Tchaikovsky plan this development from the very start, or did he 'discover' the requiemreference at the bottom of the 1Ab-descent?
238
Above all, as observed in earlier symphonies, Tchaikovsky takes on the challenge of placing
his materials in completely new surroundings, integrating them so well that their origin is at
times obscured. Technically speaking the counterpoint to the requiem quotation is of inferior
significance, but the span of the textural 1Ab counterpoint from m.185 to 230 is the far more
important - from measure 202 for the most part in the form of motivic repercussions.
Speaking of the bass-line, its structure is remarkable: except for the pauses at 230, it continues
seamlessly until m.244 where a melodic third interrupts the ensuing stepwise motion.
A possible connection between the tied/syncopated opening version of the requiem quotation
and the non-tied notes of 2A2b might look far-fetched, but the composer strengthens a
possible connection by putting the two versions side by side in a new contrapuntal
constellation, as shown in Ex.6 15. The brass instruments, which had initially quoted the
orthodox phrase, resound its opening motive in an un-syncopated, signal-like variant which
may be read as a +2A2b prolongation or 2A2a retrograde inversion. The violins and violas
use the syncopated requiem variant: syncopation and tone repetition initially opened the 2B2
phrases of theme 2B (see also Ex.6 10). Scale movement combined with tone-repetition is,
though, a common feature with both themes of the second area, and thus other motivic
interpretations than those suggested in Ex.6 15 are highly possible.
Ex.6 15 Semi-thematic (and hint of thematic) counterpoint
In the ensuing texture, the 1Ab segment is subsequently repressed for the benefit of a bass
counter-line to the development of the upper 2B2 (/2A2) segment in the trumpets and tenor
trombones (Ex.6 16). Together with a syncopated 2B2" in the upper strings they interact in
three-part thematic counterpoint leading to a fortissimo statement, in which the syncopated
version plays the central role. The continued, seamless bassline-junction between preceding
and new textures underlines the textural elegance of this contrasting development.
239
The low strings now resume their focus on 1Ab in the shape of an unstable c# pedal (Ex.6 17),
which serves as counterpoint to the syncopated 2B2'' activity of the upper strings. Together
with these string layers one also senses the paired, 2B-material in the low and middle winds whose stepwise ascent continues from the previous texture before forming an arch from
m.216. The upper trombone counterpoint of mm. 214-15 (starting with the bass trombone in
m.214) bears strong resemblance to the contour of the sequenced counterpoint written to the
recurring Subsidiary Theme's 2A2 at m.309 ff. The materials turn in direction of the
triumphant 1C3b2 'brass-turn' of m.67ff (see Ex.6 7), yet this time used in a culminating
diminuendo.
This contrapuntal culmination of the development extends over approximately fifteen

measures whereupon the retransition commences with the work's opening 1Aa motive
(m.231), projected above static, syncopated horn signals which are preserved from the
preceding texture's measures 224-30. During a hectic retransition 1Aa and 1Ab compete in
attracting our attention alongside a semi-thematic, chromatically flavored 2B bass
counterpoint at mm.237-46 (not included in Ex.6 18). In the final transitory passage 1Ac takes
control as the recapitulation sets in at m.245, utterly elegant, the symphonic drama
notwithstanding: Textural transfer brings 1Ac up to the rendezvous with 1Aa, then, after just
one-and-a-half measures it returns to the middle register as the dominating motive, thus
concluding the first thematic restatement of 1A:
240
Ex.6 18 Textural transfer of 1Ac (The semi-thematic bass counterpoint is not rendered).
The ensuing passages (mm.249-59) demonstrate timbral dialectics between the strings on the
one hand and woodwinds plus horns on the other, both groups handling Theme 1 material. In
the brief modulatory passage at 259-63 the slurred two-note motive characterizing both theme
areas are counterpointed to a permuted 1Aa motive, but this motive does not survive the entire
passage. Since the chromatic, ascending bassline has thematic references it serves at least as a
semi-thematic counterpoint, and special mention should be made of the elegant way by which
this bass-line finally reaches its thematic 1Aa-inversion:
Ex.6 19 Thematic and semi-thematic counterpoints
After two dramatic outbursts of 1Aa (m.263ff) the rather trivial and laid-back 1B3 is
thoroughly revitalized in the even more dramatic passage from m.267 (Ex.6 I 20) where its
inversion counterpoints one descending and two ascending lines. These sharply projected
lines may tend to lean even more towards the thematic side than that of the previous example;
either one may choose to read the occasionally dotted line of Ex.20 as a 2A1c or 2B reference,
yet the juxtaposition between 1B2 and 1B3 (see also Ex.6 I 4) may lend credibility to a 1B2
241
interpretation. At any rate both the dynamic, textural and harmonic223 radicalization and
renewal of the original thematic material may possibly make this episode appear as
constructed from brand new material, even though thematic characteristics already presented
are obviously present224.
Ex.6 20 Semi-thematic counterpoint
As this episode culminates, augmented 2B2 material in the strings counterpoints vestiges of
same in the trombone-descent (Ex.6 21). These thematic elements exchange instrument
groups in the ensuing transition above an f# pedal, each layer containing only faint thematic
hints225:
Ex.6 21 Dissolving semi-thematic counterpoint
2A returns accompanied by two revitalizing, elegant counterpoints. The theme, once

harmonized in a harmonic half-note rhythm, now comes with a partly chromatic ascending
eighth note progression in the violas and cellos. This linearly shaped counterpoint continues
over two phrase openings (mm.305 and 307). The second counterpoint opens in parallel
223
The harmonic tempo in this passage is tripled, at times quadrupled compared to the original thematic
statement.
224
See, for example, David Brown: Tchaikovsky. The Final Years, 1885-1893 (W. W. Norton & Co. Inc. 1991)
p.446: Brown characterizes the material as "new".
225
From m.285 the opening descent in the strings and flutes, combined with the answer in the trombones, may
possibly even give the listener the impression of a compressed 2A, a rather speculative notion that, admittedly,
corresponds with this paragraph's transitory function toward 2A/the first theme of the Subsidiary Area.
242
motion to the first, thereafter it turns into a rounded arch before given less interesting textural
challenges.
Ex.6 22 Semi-thematic counterpoints
In the ensuing 2A2 paragraph (Ex.6 23) the new dotted eighth-note - sixteenth-note version
has already been introduced, at least hinted at, in the slightly permuted, inverted reedinstrument counterpoint at m.307. The peak of this counterpoint, associated with the work's
opening motive, is now incorporated into the viola/cello counterpoint (mm.310-12). The
entire stretch of this counterpoint, connecting 2A1 and 2A2 between mm.305-310, is
seamlessly conjunct when counterpointing phrase-divisions in the theme.
Ex.6 23 Thematic (semi-thematic) counterpoint
The composer takes the three-note anacrusis of the concluding 2A Theme, augments it and
counterpoints the prolonged 1B2 reference in the strings to something reminding vaguely of
the contour of the work's opening 1Aa motive. Yet the distilled version of this motive,
portrayed at mm.242-43 in the woodwinds226, is at the same time a retrograde version of the
four opening pitches of the pivotal and melodiously strong 2A theme; both interpretations
seem equally legitimate. After the stormy contrasts of this movement, the gloom, which had
been characterizing the introduction, is replaced with a solemn, dignified close, due to the
march-like pizzicato strings and the discreet, choral-like wind sections in the major mode:
226
Fl. 1&2, Ob.1, Fag.1
243
This type of textural as well as thematic stylizations (Exx.6 21-24) possibly makes the
contrapuntal work of this first movement appear rather modest compared to the composer's
preceding opening movements. High drama, even for a Tchaikovsky symphony, together with
the soaring melodiousness of the first Subsidiary Theme, may possibly overshadow other
compositional qualities. Yet, the contrapuntal activity is about as extensive as in his earlier
sonata movements, although wanting in extensive fugatos and striking double-thematic
simultaneity.

The second movement is above all notable for its smooth handling of 5/4 time. Odd time
signatures may sometimes tend to appear rigid or static, but flexible accompaniment
contributes in avoiding this effectively, already from the start. After the first theme statement,
the cellos counterpoint the restatement in the woodwinds by a variation of its inversion:
Ex. 6 25 Thematic counterpoint
In the ensuing texturally transparent melodic variation, the composer utilizes accompanying
octave shifts consistently, mostly on the fifth degree: First, the horns accompany the strings in
this way (mm.18-24), whereupon the strings accompany the woodwinds by way of a renewal
of the horn variant (25-32). The texturization of the latter reminds one above all of a
graphically corresponding texture in the scherzo of the First Symphony. After these rather
facile textural counterpoints the music moves lightheartedly on as the high strings
counterpoint the thematic restatement in the woodwinds. Although extensive portions of the
244
theme move in stepwise motion, the counterpoint does not possess any of the most notable
characteristic motives, hence the semi-thematic classification.
As with the previous movement, melodic originality seems to prevail over striking
counterpoint. In the ensuing passage (Ex.6 27) the horn-part vaguely foreshadows the violin
and viola counterpoint from m.50ff. The violin and viola curve from 42 to 56 pictures yet
another smooth Tchaikovskyan textural transfer: The thematic variation, ascending in a
modulatory passage from 42 to 45, adopts the syncopated woodwind line (46-49), while the
woodwinds and horns play a thematic variation. At the end of this passage, the violin/viola
layer climbs even higher, reaching a variation which may in brief be described as a thematic
permutation, counterpointing thematic references in the trumpets and bass-trombone/tuba
respectively. Finally, the layer rounds off this comprehensive arch with a brief thematic
passage, falling down at m.56 on its starting-tone (f2 in the first violins, f1 in the second
violins and f in violas respectively).
Ex.6 27 Voice structure/textural transfer (violins) & thematic counterpoint (m.50ff)
245
From a contrapuntal viewpoint, the ensuing middle section is less interesting; the four-note
combinations from m.58 may possibly be associated with the work's opening motive, a
sensation being reinforced by the melodic eight-note arch-shapes from m.66. Textural
dialectics are predominant again from m.82 in the form of two complementary, transitory
paragraphs (82-89 and 90-96). Particularly elegant is the actual junction with the theme,
which occurs in the middle of a long ascending thematic line in the first violins and cellos at
mm.96-7.
As the closing of the movement draws near, the 5/4 time signature makes possible effortless
counterpoint between regular and augmented thematic lines over a d pedal:
Ex.6 28 (Semi-) thematic counterpoint
The four-note motive from the middle section rounds off this rather subdued Tchaikovsky
movement, wandering between the woodwind instruments, until it is complemented by the
opening of the actual theme in the closing measures.
The counterpoints of the first two movements come frequently in stylized form, and although
this tendency continues also into the third movement, the composer highlights another type of
solution in this vibrant march; textural counterpoint.
246

In his biography D. Brown is not quite certain what to make out of the moto perpetuo triplet
quavers, describing them as functioning
"sometimes with a thematic life on their own, but also acting as background to a
succession of ideas."227
In fact, it is impossible to imagine the effect of the "ordinary" thematic scherzo material
without the triplets. It is not unthinkable that Tchaikovsky have taken Joachim Raff's idea of
polarizing triplet figurations against the sort of thematic statement found at m.71228. If one
should feel reluctant towards characterizing these figurations as 'thematic', they are no doubt
texturally thematic (see Ex.6 29). Most of the time they appear in divisi strings, but the
rhythmically as well as melodically detailed construction encountered in mm.1-4 and 5-8
recurs several times in the movement, and is thus a thematic construction as good as any,
particularly taking into consideration the abundance of variations. The opening four-measure
formula consists of one measure of divisi, non-synchronic, staccato violins and ditto thinnedout violas, the violins thereafter move in parallel motion
upward to the more stable
woodwind layer (m.3) constructed as triplets versus duplets. Although the first three measures
are extremely closely related, to the extent of, for the most part, having benefited from being
labeled as one unit, Tchaikovsky often succeeds in finding separate textural use for them. The
first (Intro A), with its restless, unstable character, is most of the time moving from one part
of the register to another. Most of the time its structure is not quite as resilient as in this
textural theme, but formed as a less spectacular, linear stature, made up by equally formed
cells, like in m.19 ff. The second (Intro B) has a much more straightforward metric
subdivision, and is above all associated with the significant whole-tone tetrachord that
sometimes occurs after an Intro A ascent (see, for example, mm.31-36).
It is not at all necessary to single out the third measure (Intro C), which is rhythmically and
melodically closely related to Intro A, though supplied with a duplet sub-layer. Yet despite its
horizontal, inconspicuous gestalt, its repetitiveness gives it increased focus. It may serve as
the goal of the preceding Intro A and B ascent, or the fulfillment of a descent, as in mm. 1719. Alternatively at the end of an ascent, like mm.61-68, it can move but slowly upwards:
This element never acts with occasional leaps, as does an Intro A ascent or descent.
227
David Brown: Tchaikovsky. The Final Years, 1885-1893 (W. W. Norton & Co. Inc. 1991) p.452
A. Peter Brown suggests the thematic connection in A. Peter Brown: The Symphonic Repertoire Volume III
Part B (Indiana University Press, Bloomington 2008) p.424
228
247
The first half of the fourth measure contains an accentuated legato descent in the violins; Intro
D1 (Violins I a) versus a legato motivic arch in the cellos; Intro D2. The latter construction is
copied by the clarinets and first bassoon one octave below, and is, like the Intro B opening,
also used as a thematic ingredient later in the movement (integrated in Theme 1c).
Thus, this four-measure construction is formed as an arched unit: a two measure, slow ascent
in the strings up to the woodwinds followed by a one measure long, quick retreat. These
ingredients prepare and provide an extremely offensive textural backdrop. They are at least as
significant as the thematic material proper in the opening "scherzo" area of this quasi sonata
movement.
Ex.6 29 Introductory material
From m.9 the first obo hints at the forthcoming clarinet theme (m.71). Fragments of this
theme permeate the majority of the movement, and thus serve as an additional textural layer,
in addition of being purely thematic. Intro A, on the other hand, begins forming an eight
measure sub-sectional arc-structure accompanied by an additional introductory idea; a
sporadic, falling, leaping pizzicato; Intro E, at m.10, not to be confused with less texturally
significant pizzicati. Yet, the pizzicati in octave leaps from m.19 show another side of the
same coin. Later this pizzicato idea is augmented rhythmically (mm.17-18) and at m. 37 it
becomes further developed and prolonged, constituting a thematic idea. There are several
fragmentary thematic references in this movement; first there are three thematic fragments,
labeled Themes 1a, 1b and 1c respectively, and from m.71 the main march theme, labeled as
the second theme.
248
Ex.6 30 Textural counterpoints229
The above example demonstrates the main textural principle of this movement; where
important keywords are direction, (contrary) motion and thematic presence. The first
introductory texture-idea forms a stable Intro C variant at m.17, counterpointed by an
augmentation of the leapwise, falling Inro E pizzicato, which in turn gives birth to a ditto
melodically octavated b pedal. Then it starts an ascent simultaneously with the statement of
Theme 1a:
Ex.6 31Textural and (from m.19) thematic counterpoint
(Continued on the next page)

229
Divisi is notated on just one stave for reasons of space in the forthcoming examples. This may result in some
lack of detail, details being of minor importance as regards the actual textural analysis. For example, when a
divisi stave occasionally just renders single (non-harmonic) notes, this indicates that only one voice perform
them.
249
The ascending Intro A fragment leads seamlessly to Intro B (Ex.6 32). At m.31 a variant of
Theme's 1a is moved to the bass-register, and ends up counterpointing the four opening notes
of Intro B.
Ex.6 32 Textural counterpoints
The ambiguity of measures 31-36 is not caused solely by the discourse between the motives
of Theme 1a and Intro B, but results perhaps even more from the mixing of major and wholetone Intro B-tetrachords in rapid succession. From m.36 (Ex.6 33 ) a new thematic fragment is
stated; 1b, growing out of the Intro E pizzicato idea. This new thematic idea counterpoints a
rewriting of the introductory texture:
250
Ex.6 33 Textural counterpoint (the bass pizzicato pedal on g is left out)
In the ensuing rescoring of 37-41 the thematic 1b fragment is handed over to the trombones
and violas, partly in invertible counterpoint; the Intro A layer operates both above and below
1b, but only in the first half of the restatement. The latter is immediately followed by a new
thematic fragment: 1c (Ex.6 34), in the violins, flutes and clarinets, yet the statement consists
of an additional layer; the triplet anacrusis in the accompanying horns and trumpets
respectively. As was the case with the previous thematic fragments, also 1c sets off
counterpointed by Intro A. In the preceding texture only D1 had counterpointed the thematic
fragment, without any additive D material, as opposed to what happened in the introduction
m.4. Introduced by the brand new triplet signal D2 takes on a similar prominent role. Thus
there emerges an increasing flexibility between melodically thematic and texturally thematic
material, and D2 might alternatively be read as part of 1c. As regards thematic similarity,
central parts of both 1a and 1c make up a falling hexachord.
Ex.6 34 Textural counterpoint
After a rescoring of the above texture, two transitory texturally related passages emerge: First
a repeated four-measure crescendo-phrase with a fragment of the forecasted march theme
(Theme 2) counterpointing still another ascending Intro A layer over an f# pedal:
251
Ex.6 35 Textural counterpoint
The next crescendo reaches the stable, fluttering Intro C at m.61; the latter counterpointing a
slightly longer, slightly less permuted portion of the march-theme (Ex.6 36). Even though
there are two Theme 2' layers, they act complementary sooner than contrapuntally vis--vis
each other. Although the effect of this transition toward the march theme proper is telling, the
actual contrapuntal challenge is rather modest, particularly when taking into consideration the
rather flat, brief Theme 2 fragment:
Ex.6 36 Textural counterpoint (The woodwind/horn layer is omitted)
Not unexpectedly, the respective thematic clarinet & textural string layers maneuver elegantly
into position during the last two transitory measures before the second theme (Ex.6 37;
252
opening statement: mm.71-80) via duplets and triplets. After this effortless, local
counterpoint230 the Intro A string-layer proceeds downwards after an exemplary, hardly
noticeable junction between the transition and the actual theme area (70/71):
Ex.6 37 Textural counterpoint/Theme 2a, opening statement (from m.71)
At the onset of the theme, rhythmic tension arises between the hitherto dominating triplet
layer in the strings and the eighth-/sixteenth-note horn layer. But after well over seventy
measures of migration between different registers the constantly mobile triplet layer loosens
its grip on textures of the second area. For example at mm.77-80, at the rounding-off of the
first 2a statement (2a2), it disappears for a while at the expense of the already foretold linear
(eighth-note) duplet counterpoint to the actual theme. Then, after a re-scoring of the theme's
opening measures, 2A1, its prolongation, 2A2, is counterpointed by a new line in a
modulatory passage (Ex.6 38). From now on one encounters a successive chain of
contrapuntal lines that finally leads to the theme's middle section. Thus it may be about time
to attach at least a semi-thematic label to textures like these.
230
The clarinet ascent, though, suggests an overall strengthened melodically linear tendency, which is often
observed in the forthcoming area, particularly characterizing the new theme's middle part.
253
Ex.6 38, continued
The fanfare-like triplet signals from m.93ff, stated for the most part as complementary signals
between the winds and strings, lead to the remaining, compound materials of the second area
(Ex.6 39): First 2b1 is stated in the strings, with inversion between the violins and cellos.
There is an immediate 2b2-response in the clarinet and flute, counterpointing a partly
chromatic semi-thematic 2b1ascent and descent over a pedal on b.
A rescoring of the above phrases leads to a repetition of the first, concluding with a
prolongation of the first phrase; a ten-note chromatic ascent (Ex.6 40). Having in mind
Tchaikovsky's previous textural counterparts to ascending melodic lines, one could hardly
imagine another contrapuntal solution than a bass line in contrary motion. In order to ensure a
smooth reconnection with 2A, Tchaikovsky starts the contrapuntal Intro A-descent two beats
before the actual theme (m.112).
Ex.6 40 Semi-thematic counterpoint (thematic inversion)
At the return of 2A2, Tchaikovsky varies the initial counterpoint by enabling double
counterpoint via a highly elegant role change between the thematic and semi-thematic layers
respectively: the linear ascent to a permuted 2A2 stands forth as an unbroken line as the
former changes register at m.130:
254
Four repeated measures then lead to a brief retransition, built on material associated with both
Intro B and the legato-phrased Intro D2, announcing the recurrence of the restless
introductory material.
After the reprise of the first area the composer now inserts a longer and more elaborate
transition between the two groups. As was the case in the exposition, the composer makes use
of 2A1 material as the most prominent element in this long crescendo, together with semithematic linearity (Ex.6 42), made possible by continuous modulation until an efficient, yet
technically facile thematic counterpoint at m.214 (Ex.6 43).
Ex.6 42 Semi-thematic counterpoint (+ hint of thematic counterpoint)
The m.214 climax leads through a stretto (217-20) into a rather plain, texture-confined
counterpoint, at best on the gestalt of Intro D2; the motive prolongation makes possible the
255
motivic overlap. There are two factors suggesting the textural D2 and not the linear, thematic
2B1element; lack of harmonic progression and above all the typical slurred ascent + descentarch, used without supportive or additional layers.
Ex.6 44 Insignificant, texture-confined counterpoint
The restatement and rescoring of the march-area is mostly held on an
fff
level. As the
conclusion draws nearer, Tchaikovsky once again finds use for a stylized, semi-thematic bass
counterpoint beneath perpetual 2A2 cells, exemplary designed as regards physical direction
vis--vis the latter, and with its chromatic descent prolonged into the ensuing passage:
In the ensuing coda, the composer uses a corresponding yet harmonically simpler, less
chromatic procedure in the final build-up toward the concluding variation on the marchtheme. There are two semi-thematic 2B1 layers counterpointing the march-element; one
ascending and one descending. The permuted 2A1 ingredient acts as a kind of thematic organpoint taking liberties with possible harmonic obstacles, like the d natural - d sharp collisions
(mm. 318, 320 etc.). It should by now be but fair to describe the long, stepwise ascent of the
upper string-layer as highly Tchaikovskyan:
256
Ex.6 46 Semi-thematic counterpoints
The very last spasms of march-theme take place above a recurring Intro B layer; the linear
design of the latter giving it a semi-thematic touch:
Ex.6 47 Textural/semi-thematic counterpoint
Symphony No.6, movement IV; Finale

The opening of this movement brings back, possibly in an unexpected way, one of our
introductory questions concerning which layers or ideas that deserve being characterized as
'contrapuntal': Are the string parts of the opening measure individual, equally important
voices, wherefrom the highest pitches make up the theme? Since the effect of these calculated
voice crossings is a thick, homophonic string-texture, the answer must be negative. This
famous opening is possibly textured this way in order to add, at least, a sense of resistance or
suspense to an otherwise straight, falling line - suspension is also a keyword as regards the
exposition, as seen later. It is rewritten as such at the recapitulation, where falling suspensions
in the horns reflect the descents of the theme's first and third measures (m.91), eventually
257
picking up the theme's dotted quaver-semiquaver combination in the third beats (m.99-102).
This horn layer is part of a re-arrangement of the bassoon counterpoint of the exposition. In
both cases the counterpoints take over and elongate the theme.
Ex.6 48 Main theme - hinting at semi-thematic counterpoint
The subsidiary theme (Ex.6 49) is related to the main theme by its descending opening,
although it sometimes seeks an upwardly, soaring orientation during this short-lived finale. Its
introductory tone-repetitions from the weak to the strong beat possess a quality it shares with
portions of the subsidiary theme of the first movement.
The counterpoint to the main theme was characteristic for its suspensions, a feature brought
into the opening of the subsidiary theme by the partly imitative, partly inverted cello- &
double-bass counterpoint. The syncopated triplet quavers of the horn pedal add to this
suspense.
Ex.6 49 Subsidiary theme - thematic counterpoint
258
At the ensuing rescoring, the composer makes use of the contrapuntal inversions of mm.43-4
as a device by which to modulate upward toward yet another expanded rescoring (Ex.6 50). In
these modulatory transitions the inverted motive and the linear theme-reflections interact in
three part semi-thematic counterpoint, while the horizontal syncopated triplet quavers, now in
the woodwinds, move from being a pedal toward making up a fourth, linearly, ascending
layer:
Ex.6 50 Thematic counterpoints
In the reprise the composer modulates and develops the main theme after its restatement at
m.105. In this writer's view this thematic extension represents some of the problems
connected with a layer's possible contrapuntal status (Ex.51, mm.107-12). There are at least
two significant details concerning the rather anonym woodwind layer. Firstly, the composer
underscores its importance on basis of its unison/octave line and ditto pure woodwind color.
Secondly, its half-note / quarter-note structure is also found counterpointing the subsidiary
theme at its first restatement at m. 54 ff, as a purely melodic unison/octave woodwind
phenomenon. In spite of this, one feels reluctant towards adding contrapuntal significance to
any of these examples, above all because of their middle-registered layers and thus not very
profiled appearance acoustically. Nonetheless, the layers are formed with considerable
consistency, and as regards this particular incident (mm.109-12) it is constructed as a
fundamental ascent with half-note/quarter-note falls. Possibly starting as local counterpoints,
semi-thematic quality is achieved from m.113.
Ascension is also the keyword concerning the horn layer, yet here the suspensions on the first
beat give the layer a much more profiled role than the woodwind segment, and the
dissonance-resolutions mirror a weighty thematic cell (i.e. the violin part of mm.107-08). In
259
addition, the upward leap to the second beat gives it articulatory weight; initially the
characteristic, long decrescendo answering the thematic phrase had also been placed on the
second beat (see mm.106 and 108). The bottom line behind the resolved tones is a stepwise
ascent.
The cello + bass layer opens in parallel motion to the thematic layer of the upper strings
before orienting itself in direction of a semi-thematic layer moving in contrary motion.
Ex.6 51 Thematic & Semi-thematic counterpoints
At this climactic moment, the composer counterpoints one of his longest stepwise lines
against sequenced thematic material, ranging from E in the lowest wind instruments up to g3
in the trumpets (Ex.6 52). The procedure as such is strikingly similar to a fragment of the
subsidiary area of the first movement (see Ex.6 10), in which an offensive brass-line also
counterpoints a soft, sequentially descending motive. This motive is a variation on the main
theme's notes 8-13 in falling sequence.
260
Taking into account the gestalts of the original themes of this movement and their stylized
appearances, the majority of contrapuntal activity takes place in the ambiguous border-zone
between thematic and semi-thematic spheres. In the Andante at m.127 some of the dialectic
features once associated with the opening theme and respective horn-complementation are
kept, yet here the horns come first, inciting the theme fragment to action. An even smaller
element of this fragment is used for the quiet brass chorale at m.138, in which the upper voice
brings in a melodic reference to the concluding subsidiary theme, thus serving as a transition
towards it. This time the obligatory thematically based counterpoint to the subsidiary theme is
harmonically altered, yet without losing its original characteristics.
From the time of Tchaikovsky's death until this day, his Sixth Symphony has been met with
more musicological acclaim than his previous works within the genre. This is his only
symphony being without overt Russian or East-European folkloristic elements, and even
though speculations are not always fruitful, one may wonder if this comparatively generous
reception may be due to the work's un-Russianness, and that the composer consequently did
no longer represent a threat to, or adverse influence upon established Central- or WesternEuropean musical culture.231Even D. Brown, who cannot refrain from criticizing the majority
of Tchaikovsky's works, is unreservedly positive, even when he encounters "new" material in
the first movement. Although the explanation lies in the fact that No.6 is a better symphony
than his previous works in the genre, Gustav Mahler, who had conducted some of
Tchaikovsky's earlier works, like the Fifth Symphony, Manfred and Eugene Onegin, was
disappointed after his first acquaintance with the "Pathetique". We do not know for certain if
this opinion changed during the years. The greatest paradox, though, is due to the fact that
other qualities, like "the piling for climaxes" are more predominant in No.5 and in particular
No.6 - especially the last movement - than in his remaining symphonies. It is not the present
author's intention to dethrone the Sixth from the rostrum, but it might have been far from
unfair if its predecessors - not only No.4 and 5 - might join it on the podium.
231
See chapter on Reception
261
Conclusion
In sum Tchaikovsky's six symphonies contain an extremely high degree of easily identifiable
and audible counterpoint; between 40 - 50%. While it is highly problematic to make textural
analyses of Tchaikovsky's symphonies without bringing contrapuntal aspects to the surface,
this urge seems less pressing in respect of the symphonies of Brahms and Bruckner, whose
counterpoint is also definitely substantial. The majority of this counterpoint is by nature
thematic, while the amount of local, less thematic counterpoint is comparatively insignificant:
Fig.1 Total amount of contrapuntal activity in Tchaikovsky's six symphonies (%)
50
40
Them & Text. c.
30
Semi.Th. C.
20
Local c.
10
Sum
0
The Six Symphonies
The contrapuntal ingredient is relatively constant through the composer's entire symphonic
production, varying from 34% (Symphony No.4) to 58% (Symphony No.3). This lasting
tendency is notable in the majority of composer's remaining oevre, identifiable from the very
early quartet-sketches from his student days to his last chamber work; the sextet Souvenirs de
Florenze, dating from 1890-92232. Local counterpoint is as good as nonexistent in the last two
symphonies, and there is a decreasing amount of local counterpoint from the First to the Sixth
Symphony. The content of stylized lines in No.5 and No.6 has increased as compared to the
previous works at the expense of locally based counterpoint:
Fig.2 Overview of contrapuntal activity in each of the six symphonies (%)
60
50
40
Them & Text. c.
30
Semi.Th. C.
Local c.
20
Sum
10
0
Sym. No.1
232
Sym.No.2
Sym.No.3
Sym.No.4
Sym.No.5
Sketches are dating back to 1887.
262
Sym.No.6
Notable counterpoint is not primarily restricted to the outer movements or sonata movements,
but distributed quite evenly between all types of movements. This indicates that counterpoint
is an almost inescapable technical procedure with the composer. Contrapuntal and other
dialectically based approaches were his preferred developmental choices, whatever the
material, although the amount of thematic counterpoint was slightly higher in the sonata
movements than, for example, ternary-formed movements and rondo forms.
Fig.3 Overview of contrapuntal activity in the respective movements (%)233
50
40
Them. c.
30
Semi-th. c.
20
Local c.
10
Sum
0
1.mvm.
Slow m.
Scherzo etc.
Finale
The previous examination shows that Tchaikovsky, beyond doubt, is a notable orchestral
contrapuntist, a finding standing in sharp contrast to the majority of previous literature. Only
closer contrapuntal analyses of the symphonies of Brahms and Bruckner may more closely
determine exactly how notable this feature is in Tchaikovsky, although already existing
analyses far from give proof of any contrapuntal supremacy with the two B's vis--vis
Tchaikovsky. During the previous analyses, contrapuntal qualities as well as quantities have
come under scrutiny; not only are Tchaikovsky's counterpoints extensive, but the quality is
equally striking. Passages like the opening of the development of Symphony No.2 I, in which
multiple contrasting motives without additional harmonic support come into contrapuntal use,
are particularly noteworthy.
In connection with previously rendered Tchaikovsky reception, it should probably be stressed
that historicity may never come in the way of le mtier as such. Sometimes one might suspect
that the expressive (or subjective) and technical qualities of a given work - or composer - are
confused with one another, leading to disastrous and misleading musicological assessment.
233
This graph might have looked slightly different were it not for the Third Symphony, which has remarkably
high amount of counterpoint in all its five movements. In contrast to No.3, Symphony No.4 possesses a
relatively low degree of notable counterpoint in its middle movements. This goes particularly for the scherzo,
which relies on timbral dialectics at the expense of counterpoint.
263
References
Brahms, Johannes: Symphonies Nos.1, 2, 3 and 4 (Orchestral scores)
Brodbeck, David: Brahms in The Nineteenth Century Symphony, ed. D. Kern Holoman,
(Schirmer Books,London, 1997)
Brown, A. Peter: Pyotr Il'yitch Tchaikovsky in The Symphonic Repertoire Volume III Part B
(Indiana University Press, Bloomington 2008) pp.330-433
Brown, A. Peter: Bruckner in The Symphonic Repertoire Volume IV (Indiana University
Press, Bloomington 2003)
Brown, David: Tchaikovsky. The Early Years, 1840-1874. (W. W. Norton & Co. Inc. 1978)
Brown, David: Tchaikovsky. The Crisis Years, 1874-1878. (W. W. Norton & Co. Inc. 1983)
Brown, David: Tchaikovsky. The Years of Wandering, 1878-1885. (W. W. Norton & Co. Inc.
1986)
Brown, David: Tchaikovsky. The Final Years, 1885-1893 (W. W. Norton & Co. Inc. 1991)
Cooper, Martin (ed. Gerald Abraham): Tchaikovsky, A Symposium (Lindsay Drummond Ltd.,
London, 1945)
Dunsby, Jonathan: Considerations of 'texture', Music & Letters, Vol. 70, No. 1 (Feb., 1989),
pp. 46-57
Dunsby, Jonathan: Chamber music and piano in The Cambridge History of Nineteenth
Century Music, ed. J. Samson, Cambridge University Press, 2002, p.510
Evans, Edwin: Tchaikovsky (J. M. Dent & Sons Ltd, London, 1966 revision)
Hopkins, Anthony:Sounds of Music, J.M. Dent & Sons Ltd. (London 1982)
Krauss, Joseph: Tchaikovsky in The Nineteenth Century Symphony, ed. D. Kern Holoman,
Maes, Francis: Geshiedenis van de Russische muziek: Van Kamarinskaja tot Babi Jar (1996),
English translation 2002, UCLA, pp156-65
Norris, Gerald; Stanford, The Cambridge Jubilee and Tchaikovsky (David & Charles Ltd.,
Devon 1980.)
264
Parkany, J. Stephen Bruckner in The Nineteenth Century Symphony, ed. D. Kern Holoman,
Poznansky, Alexander: Tchaikovsky. The Quest for the Inner Man (English edition by Lime
Tree, London, 1993)
Sachs, Klaus-Jrgen & Dahlhaus, Carl: "Counterpoint", Grove Music Online, Oxford Music
Online; access until 2013
Shostakovich, Dmitri: Thoughts about Tchaikovsky in Russian Symphony, Philosophical
Library, New York, 1947
Taruskin, Richard; On Russian Music (University of California Press, 2008), pp.1-7, 27-34,
76-150
Taruskin, Richard: Defining Russia Musically: Historical and Hermeneutical Essays,
(Princeton University Press, 1997) pp xii-xxx, 48-54, 246-307,
Taruskin, Richard: Tchaikovsky: A New View - A Centennial Essay, in: Tchaikovsky and His
Contemporaries: A Centennial Symposium [1993], editor Alexandar Mihailovic, Westport,
Connecticut / London 1999
Tchaikovsky, Peter Ilyitch: Italian Capriccio, 1880 (orchestral score)
Tchaikovsky, Peter Ilyitch: Manfred, 1885 (orchestral score)
Tchaikovsky, Peter Ilyitch: Orchestral Suite No.1, movement I, 1879 (orchestral score)
Tchaikovsky, Peter Ilyitch: 1812 Overture, 1880 (orchestral score)
Tchaikovsky, Peter Ilyitch: Serenade for Strings, 1880 (orchestral score)
Tchaikovsky, Peter Ilyitch: Slavonic March, 1876 (orchestral score)
Tchaikovsky, Peter Ilyitch: Symphony No.1 in g minor, 1866-74 (orchestral score)
Tchaikovsky, Peter Ilyitch: Symphony No.2 in c minor, 1872-80 (orchestral score)
Tchaikovsky, Peter Ilyitch: Symphony No.3 in D, 1875 (orchestral score)
Tchaikovsky, Peter Ilyitch: Symphony No.4 in f minor, 1877-78 (orchestral score)
Tchaikovsky, Peter Ilyitch: Symphony No.5 in e minor, 1888 (orchestral score)
265
Tchaikovsky, Peter Ilyitch: Symphony No.6 in b minor, 1893 (orchestral score)

Warrack, John: Tchaikovsky, Hamish Hamilton Ltd., London, 1973
Wiley, Roland John: Tchaikovsky, Oxford University Press, 2009
266
Appendix
Overview of contrapuntal activity in the six symphonies
Turning a piece of art into numbers, commas and percentages is something one does with
considerable - even extreme - reluctance. It might possibly help to read the below figures only
in light of the previous analyses and least of all as something defined by the composer. On the
other hand it would tend toward the absurd to call for reliability and verifiability without at
least trying to live up to such verifiability. The figures are the result of definitions made by
the author in Chapter 1.3. During the process of evaluating a piece of art, recipients might perhaps even should - perceive and value some details differently, though be able to agree on
an overall basis.
2.1.5 Particularly noticeable contrapuntal activity in the First Symphony
Total amount of thematic counterpoint in Symphony No.1
Total amount of semi-thematic counterpoint in Symphony No.1
Total amount of local counterpoint in Symphony No.1
15 %
14,55 %
16,36 %
Total amount of thematic, semi-thematic and local counterpoint in Symphony No.1 46 %

In addition, the work contains a considerable amount of textural counterpoint, particularly in
the first movement.
2.1.5.1 Significant contrapuntal activity in No.1 I:
Total number of measures: 724
Thematic counterpoint, ref. by measure numbers; from - until/including:
91-94
97-100
138-49
150-73
205-10
212-13
215-19
220-25
253-57
265-69
271-72
280-84
4
4
12
24
6
2
5
6
5
5
2
5
267
286-87
293-97
300-03
306-10
313-16
319-22
325-27
328-38
485-88
491-94
522-45
562-67
595-606
607-24
627-48
TOTAL
2
5
4
5
4
4
3
11
4
4
4
6
12
18
22
188 26 %
Semi-thematic counterpoint:
117-31
179-85
187-88
191-92
194-95
197-98
200-04
233-35
244-46
341-51
362-75
574-76
586-88
664-65
667-68
670-78
TOTAL:
15
7
2
2
2
2
5
3
3
11
4
3
3
2
2
9
75 10,36 %
Total amount of thematic, semi-thematic and local counterpoint in No.1 I 36 %

2.1.5.2 Significant contrapuntal activity in No.1 II:
Thematic counterpoint:
268
54-57
112-15
TOTAL:
4
4
8 4,76 %
Semi-thematic and local counterpoint:

25-43
88-93
97-103
TOTAL:
19
6
7
32 19,05 %
Local counterpoint:
126-48
23 13,69 %
84-87
94-96
TOTAL:
4
3
7 4,17 %
Total amount of thematic, semi-thematic and local counterpoint in No.1 II 41,67 %
2.1.5.3 Significant contrapuntal activity in No.1 III:

78-85
90-101
311-14
368-75
TOTAL:
8
12
4
8
32 7,24 %
0
Local counterpoint:
1-4
16-19
25-28
33-36
41-53
86-89
4
4
4
4
13
4
269
135-50
167-202
209-15
225-34
251-66
291-93
307-09
315-18
323-26
331-43
376-79
TOTAL:
16
36
7
10
16
3
3
4
4
13
4
149 33,71 %
Total amount of thematic, semi-thematic and local counterpoint in No.1 III 41 %
2.1.5.4 Significant contrapuntal activity in No.1 IV:

Total number of measures: 600 (G.P. not included)
Comment: Very little counterpoint is being registered in the Coda: These well over a hundred
measures are notated Alla breve, thus tying up a disproportionate number of measures.
90-115
162-66
181-200
218-70
306-34
TOTAL:
26
5
20
53
29
133 22,17 %
2-3
6-7
9-15
19-28
31-33
35-36
47-54
57-60
78-80
153-59
169-70
271-78
2
2
7
10
3
2
8
4
3
7
2
8
270
294-96
360-61
364-70
375-406
415-22
434-43
447-53
467-74
479-89
TOTAL:
3
2
7
32
8
10
7
8
11
146 24,33 %
Local counterpoint:
29-30
70-77
286-93
TOTAL:
2
8
8
18 3 %
Total amount of thematic, semi-thematic and local counterpoint in No.1 IV 49,5 %
2.2.5. Particularly noticeable contrapuntal activity in the Second Symphony

34,22 %
6,49 %
8,08 %
Total amount of thematic, semi-thematic and local counterpoint in Symphony No.2 48,79 %

23-33
42-47
60-62
64-70
112-33
160-65
168-201
226-28
11
6
3
7
22
6
34
3
271
265-86
305-10
319-38
TOTAL:
22
6
20
140 38,04%
82-85
16-21
35-38
87-91
134-37
229-301
241-44
246-50
287-90
TOTAL:
4
6
4
5
4
3
4
5
4
39 10,60%
Local counterpoint:
9-14
102-06
211-13
255-59
356-61
TOTAL:
5
5
3
5
6
24 6,52%
Total amount of thematic, semi-thematic and local counterpoint in No.2 I 55,16 %

19-26
28-40
57-60
69-72
75-78
83-84
86-89
97-100
125-46
8
23
4
4
4
2
4
4
22
272
TOTAL:
75 41,9 %
101-06
121-24
TOTAL:
6
4
10 5,57 %
Local counterpoint:
43-50
79-82
107-12
149-59
TOTAL:
8
4
6
11
29 16,20
Total amount of thematic, semi-thematic and local counterpoint in No.2 II 63,67%

Significant contrapuntal activity in No.2 III:
Total number of measures (including repeats): 613
62-73
91-101
108-25
183-93
212-22
341-45
347-51
452-62
481-91
TOTAL:
12
11
18
11
11
5
5
11
11
95 15,5 %
229-46
498-515
519-30
567-72
579-84
TOTAL:
18
18
12
6
6
60 9,79 %
Local counterpoint:
273
316-38
352-63
376-93
TOTAL:
23
12
18
53 8,65 %
Total amount of thematic, semi-thematic and local counterpoint in No.2 III 33,94 %

10-19
65-88
107-12
141-68
187-90
203-08
211-16
219-41
277-84
293-300
325-468
477-508
514-19
522-27
530-44
546-52
587-95
603-13
628-33
653-58
661-66
673-78
681-86
693-95
698-703
706-16
725-29
733-35
738-43
20
24
6
28
4
6
6
23
8
8
44
32
6
6
15
7
9
11
6
6
6
6
6
3
6
11
5
3
6
274
746-56
759-60
763-64
765-73
TOTAL:
11
2
2
9
351 41,44%
Semi-thematic counterpoint: 0%
Comment: All stylized lines are given thematic classification
Local counterpoint:
57-64
8 0,94%
Total amount of thematic, semi-thematic and local counterpoint in No.2 IV 42,38 %

2.3.6 Particularly noticeable contrapuntal activity in the Third Symphony
49,64 %
5,58 %
3,26%
Total amount of thematic, semi-thematic and local counterpoint in Symphony No.3 58,48%

10-14
59-65
66-71
89-90
95-125
152-157
162-170
208-09
212-13
215-18
221-23
225-36
239-58
260-73
275-306
5
7
6
2
11
6
9
2
2
4
3
12
20
14
32
275
317-18
320-39
341-49
351-57
358-83
421-28
435-42
455-60
TOTAL:
3
20
9
7
26
8
8
6
222 47,03 %
Semi-thematic counterpoint
17-20
25-32
70-71
93-94
146-51
180-82
188-91
393-95
401-04
TOTAL:
4
8
2
2
6
3
4
3
4
36 7,63%
Local counterpoint 0%
Total amount of thematic and semi-thematic counterpoint in No.3 I: 54,66 %

11-16
20-46
62-69
70-83
84-90
93-98
101-22
127-35
137-48
154-69
171-97
6
27
8
14
7
6
22
9
12
16
27
276
213-33
234-49
255-61
TOTAL
21
16
7
198 68,51%
Semi-thematic counterpoint 0%
Local counterpoint
47-58
197-210
TOTAL:
12
14
26 9%
Total amount of thematic and local counterpoint in No.3 II: 77,51%

Comment: What distinguishes the triplets of this symphony from those of No.6/III is above all
their expository highlighting already at the introduction of the former.
Alternatively one might reduce the thematic importance and view the triplets as an
architectonically striking textural strategy, in line with that of No.6/III.

1-8
17-21
35-38
41-42
45-62
68-76
80-88
90-101
104-33
137-47
149-56
TOTAL
8
5
4
2
18
9
9
12
30
11
8
116 63,39 %
Local & Semi-thematic counterpoint 0

Total amount of thematic and local counterpoint in No.3 III 63,39%
277

21-28
37-45
47-68
71-88
264-77
280-87
296-303
306-26
330-47
TOTAL
8
9
22
18
14
8
8
21
18
126 28,70 %
Semi-thematic counterpoint 0%
Local counterpoint:
109-124
368-83
TOTAL
16
16
32 7,29 %
Total amount of thematic and local counterpoint in No.3 IV: 35,99 %
2.3.6.5 Significant contrapuntal activity in No.3 V:

9-19
35-39
41-49
50-57
66-80
82-88
90-99
131-38
165-73
181-240
TOTAL
11
5
9
8
15
7
10
8
9
60
142 40,57%
278
Semi-thematic counterpoint
1-6
28-33
106-08
111-16
158-64
174-76
241-42
258-72
278-84
290-99
310-12
314-16
TOTAL
6
6
3
6
7
3
2
15
7
10
3
3
71 20,29%
Total amount of thematic, semi-thematic and local counterpoint in No.3 V: 60,86 %
2.4.5 Particularly noticeable contrapuntal activity in the Fourth Symphony

53-71
74-75
78-85
117-18
120-33
161-75
179-80
217-21
230-34
237-46
248-49
253-56
257-71
278-81
284-90
296-97
19
2
8
2
14
15
2
5
5
10
2
4
15
4
7
2
279
299-312
342-44
TOTAL:
14
3
133 31,52%
30-35
39-42
202-05
207-10
TOTAL:
6
4
4
4
18 4,27%
Local counterpoint:
0
Total amount of thematic, semi-thematic and local counterpoint in No.4 I 35,79%
Significant contrapuntal activity in No.4 II:
34-40
7 2,30%
22-24
30-32
134-55
TOTAL:
3
3
22
28 9,21%
Local counterpoint:
77-96
20
156-65
10
200-17
18
TOTAL:
48 15,79%
186-96
11 2,66%
280
0
Local counterpoint:
0
Total amount of thematic, semi-thematic and local counterpoint in No.4 III 2,66%
Significant contrapuntal activity in No.4 IV:

68-91
103-10
159-73
175-81
188-99
TOTAL:
24
8
15
7
12
66 22,53%
47-49
100-02
136-38
281-84
TOTAL:
3
3
3
4
13 4,44%
Local counterpoint:
0
Total amount of thematic, semi-thematic and local counterpoint in No.4 IV 26,97%
2.5.5 Particularly noticeable contrapuntal activity in the Fifth Symphony

14,75%
4,48%
3,95%
281

68-73
76-77
80-83
88-89
94-95
100-07
156-57
160-61
164-65
168-85
194-97
227-34
236-43
271-76
278-80
282-84
347-48
351-52
355-56
413-14
417-18
421-22
425-42
451-54
TOTAL:
6
2
4
2
2
8
2
2
2
18
4
8
8
6
3
3
2
2
2
2
2
2
18
4
114 21,03%
57-65
108-18
132-33
136-37
186-93
200-01
204-05
297-300
337-44
363-72
389-90
393-94
9
11
2
2
8
2
3
4
8
10
2
2
282
443-50
457-58
461-62
487-99
507-30
TOTAL:
8
2
2
13
24
112 20,66%
Local counterpoint: 0%
Significant contrapuntal activity in No.5 II:
16-25
32-38
44-59
84-86
91-98
116-34
143-48
153-55
171-78
TOTAL:
10
7
16
3
8
19
6
3
8
80 43,48%
75-82
87-90
142 (-156)
149-52
TOTAL:
8
4
1
4
17 9,24%

283
12-18
145-59
TOTAL:
7
15
22 8,27%
45-56
186-97
TOTAL:
12
12
24 9,02%
Total amount of thematic, semi-thematic and local counterpoint in No.5 III 17,29%
Significant contrapuntal activity in No.5 IV:

16-18
70-73
82-83
86-87
90-91
94-97
99-113
128-39
148-55
168-71
202-05
234-59
296-315
324-25
328-29
332-33
336-39
341-67
399-401
403-05
414-51
504-17
3
4
2
2
2
4
15
12
8
4
4
26
20
2
2
2
4
27
3
3
38
14
284
TOTAL:
201 35,58%
4-7
13-15
24-37
39-42
74-77
114-18
140-47
164-67
174-75
178-87
190-91
194-201
206-09
220-30
260-66
316-19
378-97
474-81
486-88
531-37
TOTAL:
4
3
4
4
4
5
8
4
2
10
2
8
4
11
7
4
20
8
3
7
122 21,59%
Local counterpoint:
490-99 1,77%
Total amount of thematic, semi-thematic and local counterpoint in No.5 IV
55,19%
27,09%
15,13%
0,44%
2.6.5 Particularly noticeable contrapuntal activity in the Sixth Symphony

285
17,93%
27,69%
Total amount of textural counterpoint in Symphony No.6
9,46%
0%
Thematic, semi-thematic and textural counterpoint in Symphony No.6
55,08%

31-36
39-74
102-09
111-17
119-25
143-50
172-98
203-06
TOTAL:
6
36
8
7
7
8
27
4
103 29,10%
207-22
239-46
259-63
268-75
286-98
305-16
336-43
TOTAL:
16
8
5
8
13
12
8
70 19,77%

9-15
42-45
50-53
58-60
7
4
4
3
286
62-64
82-84
86-88
TOTAL:
3
3
3
27 14,44%
25-27
33-41
113-16
136-44
151-55
161-68
TOTAL:
3
9
4
9
4
8
37 19,79%

214-18
5 1,43%
69-70
93-112
197-213
229-54
256-75
283-315
318-26
332-39
TOTAL:
2
20
17
26
20
43
9
8
145 41,55%
Textural counterpoint
9-16
19-34
37-47
49-50
53-68
71-79
81-92
113-36
147-54
157-68
8
16
11
2
16
9
12
24
8
12
287
175-84
187-88
191-92
TOTAL:
10
2
2
132 37,82%
Total amount of thematic, semi-thematic and textural counterpoint in No.6 III 80,80%

39-43
47-59
63-70
109-11
149-55
157-63
TOTAL:
4
13
8
3
7
7
46 26,74%
11-15
23-29
84-102
112-25
139-44
TOTAL:
5
7
19
14
6
51 29,65%
Total amount of thematic, semi-thematic and local counterpoint in No.6 IV 56,39%
288

Tchaikovskys-Orch-Style Analis SM 6

Enviado por

Dados do documento

Título original

Direitos autorais

Formatos disponíveis

Compartilhar este documento

Compartilhar ou incorporar documento

Opções de compartilhamento

Você considera este documento útil?

Este conteúdo é inapropriado?

Direitos autorais:

Formatos disponíveis

Tchaikovskys-Orch-Style Analis SM 6

Enviado por

Direitos autorais:

Formatos disponíveis

Thematic Counterpoint

And Adjacent Constructional Texturing

1.1.2 The Russian

1.1.3 The not-so-Russian

1.1.4 The homosexual

1.1.5 The neurotic

1.1.6 Musicological status by the onset of the twenty-first century

1.2 General aspects to counterpoint

1.2.1 Occurrence of thematic counterpoint in symphonic literature before

1.2.2 Possible direct influences

1.3 Definitions of some selected concepts appearing in this document

1.3.2 Poly-linear textures ('Constructions')

1.3.3 Thematic counterpoint

1.3.4 Local counterpoint

1.3.5 Semi-thematic counterpoint and Stylized counterpoint

1.3.6 Textural field (texture)

1.3.7 Textural layer ('layer'/segment)

1.3.8 Textural element

1.3.9 Textural Counterpoint; Textural Strategy or Textural Factor

1.3.10 Texture-confined counterpoint

1.3.11 Motivic textural transfer (Textural Transfer)

1.3.13 Physical direction (direction)

1.4 Comments about the score examples

1.4.1 Presentation and intention

1.4.2 Abbreviations in score reductions

1.5.1 Thematic and motivic classification used in music examples

1.5.2 Analysis in context

1.6 Extent of contrapuntal activity within each movement

1.7 Related problems for future discussion and research

1.7.1 Counterpoint, research and verifiability

1.7.2 Triads in contrapuntal context

1.7.3 Harmonic progression

1.8 Nineteenth century orchestral counterpoint,

1.8.2 The counterpoint of Johannes Brahms, as discussed in two anthologies

2.1.1 Symphony No.1 in g-minor op. 13

2.1.1.1 S. No.1, Movement I: Orchestral backdrop: Textural Counterpoint;

2.1.2 Symphony No.1, movement II (Land of Desolation, Land of Mists)

2.1.4 Symphony No.1, movement IV

2.1.4.1 Semi-thematic counterpoint

2.1.4.2 Thematic Counterpoint

2.2.1 Introduction: A Russian Backdrop for The Little Russian

2.2.1.1 Symphony No.2, movement I, Thematic material

2.2.1.2 Thematically based counterpoint in the first movement

2.2.2 Second Symphony, movement II

2.2.3 Second Symphony, movement III

2.2.4 Second Symphony, movement IV

2.3 Symphony No. 3 in D, op.29

2.3.1 Symphony No.3, movement I

2.3.2 Symphony No.3, movement II

2.3.3 Symphony No.3, Movement III

2.3.4 Symphony No.3, movement IV

2.3.5 Symphony No.3, movement V

2.4 Symphony No.4 in f-minor, opus 36

2.4.1 Symphony No.4, movement I

2.4.2 Symphony No.4, movement II

2.4.3 Symphony No.4, movement III

2.4.4 Symphony No.4, movement IV

2.5 Symphony No.5 in e minor, opus 64

2.5.1 Symphony No.5, movement I

2.5.2 Symphony No.5, movement II

2.5.3 Symphony No.5, movement III

2.5.4 Symphony No.5, movement IV

2.6 Symphony No.6 in b-minor (Pathtique"), opus 74